alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANNES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of County Bank Corp on form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Joseph H. Black, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

     (4)  The Information contained in the Report fairly presents in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


/s/ Joseph H. Black
-------------------------------------
Joseph H. Black
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2005

I, Susanne Dickey, Assistant Financial Officer of the Company, concur with the
above statement.


/s/ Susanne Dickey
-------------------------------------
Susanne Dickey
Assistant Financial Officer
November 10, 2005
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 50399 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

− Appellee ,

v ersus JOSE DANILO CONTRERAS

- MARTINEZ , Defendant

− Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 2:16

- CR

- 1135

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

J ose C ontreras

- M artinez appeals his 27

- month sentence for illegal

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 16, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-50399 Document: 00514350281 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/16/2018No. 17

- 50399

2 reentry after deportation. He asserts that his indictment did not allege that he had a prior conviction , so his sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) violated his due

- p rocess rights by exceed ing the two

- year statutory maximum in § 1326(a)

. The g overnment has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance, asserting that Almendarez

- Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), fore

closes Contreras

- Martinez ’s position

. Contreras

- Martinez concedes that his argument was rejected in Almendarez

- Torres and explains that he raises it to preserve it for further review; thus, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the mo tion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. The judg ment is AFFIRMED. The g overnment’s alternative motion for an exten

sion of ti me to file a brief is DENIED. Case: 17-50399 Document: 00514350281 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/16/2018
Specialty Foods Acquisition Corporation
      Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
               (in thousands, except ratios)




                                1992      1993      1994      1995      1996

Earnings:
  Income (loss) from 
   continuing operations       12,550   (16,994)  (62,800)  (258,351) (475,397)
  Add:
  Provision for taxes           3,817     5,772     1,626      1,653     1,367
  Fixed Charges                27,320    59,640   122,957    135,461   141,851
Earnings as adjusted (A)       43,687    48,418    61,783   (121,237) (332,179)

Fixed charges:
  Interest Expense             21,336    49,613   107,036    122,072   127,646
  Amortization of deferred 
    debt issuance costs           397     4,209    10,940      7,504     6,081
  Rents under leases 
    representative of an 
    interest factor             5,587     5,818     4,981      5,885     8,124
Fixed charges as adjusted (B)  27,320    59,640   122,957    135,461   141,851

Ratio of earnings to fixed
  charges (A) divided by (B)     1.60        - 1       - 1        - 1       - 1



1 Earnings are inadequate to cover fixed charges by $474,030
in 1996, $256,698 in 1995, $61,174 in 1994, and $11,222 in
1993.
EXHIBIT
32.1








CERTIFICATION
BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


(SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of PICO Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John R.
Hart, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (“Section 906”), that to the best of my knowledge:





(1) The
Report fully complies with requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and





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














Date: May
7, 2009





/s/ John R.
Hart


John R.
Hart


President
and Chief Executive Officer
##### 



Exhibit 10.7
 AMERISTAR CASINOS, INC.
RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AGREEMENT
 Name and Address of Award Holder:Date of Grant:No. of RSUs:Vesting Schedule:
    
    
    
    shares onshares onshares onshares on




---



##### 



1.
    
    Grant of RSUs
 .
 2.
    
    Vesting of RSUs
  CumulativePercentage
    
    PercentageVesting Date
    
    of RSUs Vested
    
    of RSUs Vested25
    %
    
    
    25
    %25
    %
    
    
    50
    %25
    %
    
    
    75
    %25
    %
    
    
    100
    %




---



##### 



3.
    
    Settlement of RSUs; Delivery of Shares
  4.
    
    Change in Control; Corporate Transaction
  5.
    
    Income Tax Withholding
  6.
    
    Other Provisions of RSUs
 (a)
    
    Voting.You will have no voting rights or other rights as a stockholder with
respect to your RSUs prior to the time shares of Common Stock are delivered to you in
settlement of the award.(b)
    
    Dividends.You will not be entitled to receive dividends or dividend
equivalents with respect to your RSUs prior to the time shares of Common Stock are
delivered to you in settlement of the award.(c)
    
    Transfer Restrictions.You may not sell, transfer, assign or pledge your RSUs
or any rights under this award. Any attempt to do so will be null and void.(d)
    
    Death.In the event of your death after the vesting but prior to settlement of
your RSUs, any shares of Common Stock you are entitled to receive upon settlement of




---



##### 



your RSUs will instead be delivered to your designated beneficiary or, if you have not
designated a beneficiary, to the legal representative of your estate.
 7.
    
    Adjustments to Your Award in Certain Events
  8.
    
    Regulatory Compliance
  9.
    
    Plan Terms
  10.
    
    Method of Acceptance
   AMERISTAR CASINOS, INC.By:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-20200

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAY McADAMS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-97-CR-166-1

- - - - - - - - - -

December 10, 1998

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ray McAdams appeals his conviction and sentence for

conspiracy to possess cocaine base with intent to distribute and

possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). He argues that the

district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the

cocaine base that was seized and the oral and written statements

he made to police officers following the seizure. 

We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties

and conclude that the district court did not err in denying 
No. 98-20200

-2-

McAdams’ motion to suppress evidence. See United States v.

Reyes, 792 F.2d 536, 539 (5th Cir. 1986). The district court did

not clearly err in determining that, under the totality of the

circumstances, McAdams gave valid consent to search his suitcase,

see United States v. Kelley, 981 F.2d 1464, 1470 (5th Cir. 1993),

nor did the district court err in concluding that the written

statement McAdams gave following his arrest was voluntarily made

following a valid waiver of rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384

U.S. 436 (1966). See United States v. Hall, 152 F.3d 381, 424

(5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Andrews, 22 F.3d 1328, 1337

(5th Cir. 1994). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

H:\MCADAMS.OP
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2405 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2405

  To authorize appropriations for the Merit Systems Protection Board.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 1993

Mr. Clay (by request) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
           to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize appropriations for the Merit Systems Protection Board.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 8(a)(1) of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (5 
U.S.C. 5509 note) is amended by striking ``for each of fiscal years 
1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1994,''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act shall take effect on October 1, 1994.

                                 <all>
```
exv10w2



 







EXHIBIT 10.2




REVOLVING CREDIT NOTE





			
	$10,000,000
	 	June 30, 2006






     On the Revolving Credit Maturity Date, FOR VALUE RECEIVED, North Pointe Holdings Corporation,
a Michigan corporation (“Company”) promises to pay to the order of Comerica Bank (“Bank”) care of
Comerica Bank, as Agent, at 500 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226, in lawful money of the United
States of America, the sum of Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000), or so much of said sum as may from
time to time have been advanced and then be outstanding hereunder pursuant to the Second Amended
and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of June 30, 2006, made by and among the Company, certain
banks, including the Bank, and Comerica Bank as Agent for such banks, as the same may be amended
from time to time (the “Agreement”), together with interest thereon as hereinafter set forth.



     Each of the Advances made hereunder shall bear interest at the Applicable Interest Rate from
time to time applicable thereto under the Agreement or as otherwise determined thereunder, and
interest shall be computed, assessed and payable as set forth in the Agreement.



     This Note is a note under which advances (including refundings and conversions), repayments
and readvances may be made from time to time, but only in accordance with the terms and conditions
of the Agreement. This Note evidences borrowings under, is subject to, is secured in accordance
with, and may be accelerated or matured under, the terms of the Agreement, to which reference is
hereby made. Definitions and terms of the Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference herein.



     This Note shall be interpreted and the rights of the parties hereunder shall be determined
under the laws of, and enforceable in, the State of Michigan.



     Company hereby waives presentment for payment, demand, protest and notice of dishonor and
nonpayment of this Note and agrees that no obligation hereunder shall be discharged by reason of
any extension, indulgence, release, or forbearance granted by any holder of this Note to any party
now or hereafter liable hereon or any present or subsequent owner of any property, real or
personal, which is now or hereafter security for this Note.



i









 





     Nothing herein shall limit any right granted Bank by any other instrument or by law.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	NORTH POINTE HOLDINGS

CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:	 	 
	 

	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Its:	 	 
	 

	 	 	 





ii
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Pioneer Companies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael Y. McGovern, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the
Company.

Date: November 13, 2003            /s/ Michael Y. McGovern
                                   --------------------------------
                                   Michael Y. McGovern
                                   President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the audited
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 1996 and the audited consolidated
statement of income for the year ended December 31, 1996 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,749
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,023
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,086)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,790
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,425
<PP&E>                                         907,027
<DEPRECIATION>                               (235,162)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 733,613
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,085
<BONDS>                                        343,907
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           278
<OTHER-SE>                                     263,415
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   733,613
<SALES>                                        185,558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               189,505
<CGS>                                           44,615
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  158,005
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,822
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 31,500
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,398
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,102
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    21,102
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .76
        

</TABLE>
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

NEWS RELEASE

Office of the Executive Director

Washington, D.C.

Contact: Lisa M. Boyd Release No. 13-01

Executive Director August 7, 2013

(202) 434-9905

lboyd@fmshrc.gov

WILLIAM I. ALTHEN SWORN IN AS COMMISSIONER

OF THE FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

William I. Althen, of Vienna, Virginia, was sworn in today as a Commissioner of the Federal 

Mine Safety and Health Review Commission. He was nominated by President Barack Obama on 

May 23, 2013, for a term expiring August 30, 2018. 

Commissioner Althen was the founder of William I. Althen Consulting, which provided

counseling on legal issues related to health, safety, labor, and employment matters. Previously,

he served as Of Counsel in the Ogletree Deakins law firm from 2004 to 2010, and from 2003 to 

2009, he was an adjunct professor at George Mason University. From 1981 to 2003, he was 

Founder and Managing Partner of the Heenan, Althen & Roles law offices in Washington, D.C. 

and Charleston, West Virginia. Commissioner Althen received his A.B. from Georgetown 

University and a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center.

The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission is an independent adjudicative agency 

that provides administrative trial and appellate review of legal disputes arising under the Federal 

Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.
#### Donna M. CARTER, Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Appellee.

No. 10-2895.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 3, 2011.

Filed: Feb. 8, 2011.

John Wayne Kocourek, Council Bluffs, IA, for Appellant.

Jeremiah Hayes, Assistant Regional Counsel, Kristi Schmidt, Deputy, Social Security Administration Office of General Counsel Region VII, Kansas City, MO, Gary L. Hayward, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellee.

Before BYE, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Donna M. Carter appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits. Upon careful review of the record, *see Medhaug v. Astrue,*578 F.3d 805, 813 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review), we find that the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) credibility determination is entitled to deference because it was based on several valid reasons, *see Finch v. Astrue,*547 F.3d 933, 935-36 (8th Cir.2008); and that it was *968proper for the ALJ to decline to give weight to the vague, conclusory, and unsupported opinions of treating physician Charles Pigneri on Carter’s residual functional capacity, *see Brown v. Astrue,*611 F.3d 941, 952 (8th Cir.2010). We reject Carter’s assertion that the new evidence she offered in the district court justifies remand, *see Jones v. Callahan,*122 F.3d 1148, 1154 (8th Cir.1997); and we lack jurisdiction to consider the Commissioner’s refusal to reopen, *see Efinchuk v. Astrue,*480 F.3d 846, 848 (8th Cir.2007). Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
Just i ces

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 21, 2012

d0514 

# Order

May 21, 2012

144477

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144477 COA: 306534 Kent CC: 10-011184-FC; JONATHAN EUGENE HENDERSON, 10-011185-FC; Defendant-Appellant. 10-011187-FC

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 21, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2569 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2569

  To freeze domestic discretionary spending for fiscal years 1994 and 
                    1995 at fiscal year 1993 levels.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 30, 1993

  Mr. Franks of Connecticut introduced the following bill; which was 
 referred jointly to the Committees on Government Operations and Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To freeze domestic discretionary spending for fiscal years 1994 and 
                    1995 at fiscal year 1993 levels.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Domestic Spending Freeze Act of 
1993''.

SEC. 2. SPENDING FREEZE FOR FISCAL YEARS 1994 AND 1995.

    (a) Spending Freeze.--The spending limits set forth in section 
601(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for the domestic 
category with respect to fiscal years 1994 and 1995 shall not exceed 
the limits provided for fiscal year 1993.
    (b) Enforcement.--The limits on domestic spending provided in this 
Act shall be enforced as provided in the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 
and the amendments made by such Act, except that for purposes of fiscal 
years 1994 and 1995 the discretionary spending limit shall be enforced 
as provided for fiscal year 1993.

                                 <all>
```
EX-10.3





 Exhibit 10.3 

Annual Compensation of Directors of 

Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation and First National Bank 

As of January 1, 2020 
 Cash Compensation (1) 
 Annual retainer 
  

					
	 Pinnacle Director
	  	$	4,000	 
	 First National Bank Director
	  	$	6,000	 

 Additional Pinnacle annual retainers 

 

					
	 Chairman of the Board
	  	$	3,000	 
	 Vice Chairman of the Board
	  	$	1,500	 
	 Audit Committee Chairman
	  	$	1,500	 
	 Compensation Committee Chairman
	  	$	1,000	 
	 Nominating Committee Chairman
	  	$	1,000	 

 Committee meeting fees 

In addition to the annual retainers, outside directors also receive $350 for each committee meeting attended. 

(1) Under the Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation 2014 Incentive Stock Plan, directors may choose to receive up to 100% of their director fees in the form of
Pinnacle common stock.