alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex4-4.htm


     

     

    EXHIBIT
      4.4

    


    


    
      	
              CERTIFICATE
                OF AMENDMENT

              TO
                THE

              RESTATED
                CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

              OF

            
	
              RITE
                AID CORPORATION

            
	
              _________________________________________

            
	 
	
              Pursuant
                to Section 242 of the General

            
	
              Corporation
                Law of the State of Delaware

            
	
              _________________________________________

            


    

    


    
      	
              Rite
                Aid Corporation, a Delaware corporation (hereinafter called the
                "Corporation"), does hereby certify as follows:

            
	 
	
                                                              
                FIRST: The first paragraph of Article FOURTH of the Corporation's
                Restated
                Certificate of Incorporation, relating to the capital structure of
                the
                Corporation, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as set forth
                below:

            


    

    


    
      	 	
               "FOURTH:
                The total number of shares of stock 

              which
                the corporation shall have authority to issue 

              shall
                be one billion five hundred twenty million 

              (1,520,000,000)
                shares of which one billion five
hundred million (1,500,000,000) shares
                shall be 

              Common
                Stock of the par value of $1.00 per share, 

              and
                twenty million (20,000,000) shares shall be 

              Preferred
                Stock of the par value of $1.00 per share." 

            	 


    

    


    
      	
                                                             
                 SECOND: This amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation,
                as amended, was duly adopted in accordance with Section 242 of the
                General
                Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

            
	 
	
                                                        
                IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Rite Aid Corporation has caused this Certificate
                to be
                duly executed in its corporate name this 4th day of June,
                2007.

            


    

    


     

    
      	 	 	
              RITE
                AID CORPORATION

            
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
              By:

            	
              /s/
                Robert B. Sari

            
	 	 	
              Name:

            	
              Robert
                B. Sari

            
	 	 	
              Title:

            	
              Executive
                Vice President,

            
	 	 	 	
              General
                Counsel and Secretary
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gregory George RUTLEDGE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-7365.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 14, 2016.

Decided: Jan. 20, 2016.

Gregory George Rutledge, Appellant Pro Se. Jack Hanly, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant.

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gregory George Rutledge appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to terminate his supervised release judgement under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Rutledge,*No. 1:04-cr00321-LMB-1 (E.D.Va: filed Aug. 12 & entered Aug. 13, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED,*
#### Dedra Carol SPAFFORD, Petitioner—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 10-7127.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 21, 2010.

Decided: Jan. 4, 2011.

*817Dedra Carol Spafford, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer R, Bockhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, Dennis H. Lee, Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office, Tazewell, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dedra Carol Spafford seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Spafford has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
#### Nazario NOLASCO-ALONZO, aka Nazaro Nolasco, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-70363.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 20, 2016.*

Filed Jan. 27, 2016.

Nazario Nolasco-Alonzo, San Marcos, CA, pro se.

Arthur Leonid Rabin, Trial, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Nazario Nolasco-Alonzo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.2005), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Nolasco-Alonzo’s motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, where Nolasco-Alonzo did not comply with the procedural requirements set forth in *Matter of Lozada,*19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), and the ineffective assistance he alleges is not plain on the face of the record. *See Reyes v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 592, 597-99 (9th Cir.2004).

Because the BIA’s determination that Nolasco-Alonzo failed to comply with the threshold requirements to bring an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is disposi-*491tive, we need not reach his contentions regarding his underlying conviction. *See Simeonov v. Ashcroft,*371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir.2004) (“As a general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. Knight Hawk Coal, LLC              

#   Secretary of Labor v. Knight Hawk Coal, LLC

KnightHawk LAKE 2019-0087 Meeting Notice 1-9-20.pdf

KnightHawk LAKE 2019-0087 Meeting Notice 1-9-20.htm

commission-open-meetingsecretary-labor-v-knight-hawk-coal-llc-docket-no-lake-2019-87-r01-09-2020.mp3

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: (202)434-9900TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
                      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-QSB of Bioaccelerate, Inc. (the
"Company") for the three months ended August 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Basil
Parker, President and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


                               /s/ Basil Parker
                               -----------------------------
                               Basil Parker
                               President and Director
                               April 29, 2004
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. KenAmerican Resources, Inc.              

#   Secretary of Labor v. KenAmerican Resources, Inc.

KenAmerican KENT 2013-0211 Meeting Notice 5-19-16.pdf

KenAmerican KENT 2013-0211 Meeting Notice 5-19-16.htm

secretary-labor-v-kenamerican-resources-docket-kent-2013-0211.mp3

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: 771-210-1887 TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                         1,000
       
<S>                             <C>        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                            3169
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            7117
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                            8921
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                              8902
<LOANS>                                         123906
<ALLOWANCE>                                        958
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  150551
<DEPOSITS>                                      125397
<SHORT-TERM>                                        92
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               2404
<LONG-TERM>                                      10600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2035
<OTHER-SE>                                       10020
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  150551
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   2980
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  160
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    79
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  3119
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                1555
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1734
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             1384
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       10
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   1160
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    479
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         479
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       304
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.88
<LOANS-NON>                                       1760
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   955
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       35
<RECOVERIES>                                        28
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  958
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            958
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
 
FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1998
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.01
 
                           CARAUSTAR INDUSTRIES, INC.
 
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
                                  (UNAUDITED)
 
           COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                  MARCH 31,
                                                              ------------------
                                                               1998       1997
                                                              -------    -------
<S>                                                           <C>        <C>
Earnings:
  Net income available to common stock......................  $13,177    $11,741
Shares:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding................   25,280     24,815
  Dilutive effect of stock options..........................      232        348
                                                              -------    -------
  Average diluted shares outstanding and equivalent.........   25,512     25,163
Basic earnings per common share:
          Net income........................................  $  0.52    $  0.47
                                                              =======    =======
Diluted earnings per common share:
          Net income........................................  $  0.52    $  0.47
                                                              =======    =======
</TABLE>
 
                                       17
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated August 24, 2001, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on September 6, 2001, (66 FR 46653), Chattem Chemicals, Inc., 3801 St. Elmo Avenue, Building 18, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed below: Drug
ScheduleN-Ethylamphetamine (1475)
I4-Methoxyamphetamine (7411)
I2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine (7396)
IDifenoxin
IAmphetamine (1100)
IIMethamphetamine (1105)
IIMethylphenidate (1724)
IIPentobarbital (2270)
IISecobarbital (2315)
IICodeine (9050)
IIOxycodone (9143)
IIDiphenoxylate (9170)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IIMeperidine (9230)
IIMorphine (9300)
IIThebaine (9333)
IIAlfentanil (9737)
IISufentanil (9740)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The firm plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances to produce products for distribution to its customers. No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in Title 21, United States Code, Section 823(a) and determined that the registration of Chattem Chemicals, Inc. to manufacture the listed controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Chattem Chemicals, Inc. to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. This investigation included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823 and 28 CFR §§ 0.100 and 0.104, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, hereby orders that the application submitted by the above firm for registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed above is granted. Dated: December 18, 2001. Laura M. Nagel, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. 01-31822 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-M