alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amended Offer Letter By and Between the Registrant and Michael K. Brawer



 EXHIBIT 10.34 
 August 1, 2007 
 Michael K. Brawer, M.D. 
 Interim
Chief Medical Officer 
 Re: Amended Employment Terms 
 Dear
Michael, 
 This letter confirms that Threshold Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) has amended the employment terms stated in
your offer letter dated February 22, 2006. 
 The Company will reimburse you for reasonable travel and living expenses associated with
working in our Redwood City offices; provided that you submit receipts or documentation reasonably satisfactory to the Company evidencing such expenses. These expenses are considered to be taxable compensation for federal and state purposes, and the
Company will gross-up these expense reimbursements for such taxes based on the Company’s calculations. The Company has granted you a one-time bonus of approximately $20,000, in the form of grossed-up payments by the Company for taxes, interest,
penalties and tax preparation fees incurred related to your travel and living expense reimbursements paid by the Company in 2006 based upon statutory tax rates and the Company’s calculations. 
 Please indicate your acceptance of our offer by signing below and returning the original copy of this letter of employment from Threshold
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. under the terms described above. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 650.474.8205. 
 Sincerely, 
  

	
	 /s/ Harold E. Selick

	Harold E. Selick, Ph.D.
	Chief Executive Officer
	
	Accepted:
	
	 /s/ Michael K. Brawer

	Michael K. Brawer, M.D.
	Interim Chief Medical Officer
EXHIBIT 32




CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER




PURSUANT
TO




18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,




AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Simon
B. Moss, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
Avistar Communications Corporation on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Avistar
Communications Corporation.




Date: March 31,
      2008
            
            By:
            
            /s/
      Simon B. MossSimon
      MossChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)







I, Robert
J. Habig, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
Avistar Communications Corporation on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Avistar
Communications Corporation.




Date: March 31,
      2008
            
            By:
            
            /s/
      Robert J. HabigRobert
      J. HabigChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
§ 923.24 Shorefront access and protection planning. ( a ) The management program must include a definition of the term “beach” and a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, esthetic, ecological or cultural value.
( b ) The basic purpose in focusing special planning attention on shorefront access and protection is to provide public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historic, esthetic, ecological or cultural value with special management attention within the purview of the State's management program. This special management attention may be achieved by designating public shorefront areas requiring additional access or protection as areas of particular concern pursuant to § 923.21 or areas for preservation or restoration pursuant to § 923.22.
( c ) The management program must contain a procedure for assessing public beaches and other public areas, including State owned lands, tidelands and bottom lands, which require access or protection, and a description of appropriate types of access and protection.
( d ) The management program must contain a definition of the term “beach” that is the broadest definition allowable under state law or constitutional provisions, and an identification of public areas meeting that definition.
( e ) The management program must contain an identification and description of enforceable policies, legal authorities, funding program and other techniques that will be used to provide such shorefront access and protection that the State's planning process indicates is necessary.
----

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: November 22, 2010 | By:                                                          | /s/ Serik Bazarbayev |   |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------|
|                    | Serik Bazarbayev                                             |
|                    | Interim Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) |

----
Table 2.  Relationship Between Ethnicity Categories in NCHS Data and Categories Mandated by OMB

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census
Internet Release date: June 1997


          NCHS Category                                  OMB Mandated Category

              Non-Hispanic------------------------------------Non-Hispanic

              Mexican--------------------------|
                                               |
              Puerto Rican                     |
                                               |
              Cuban                            |--------------Hispanic
                                               |
              Central or South American        |
                                               |
              Other Hispanic-------------------|

              Unknown-----------------------------------------must be recoded into one of the above categories
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A2 19 8

. DENNI S THOMAS v . C I TY OF ATLANTA FI REFI GHTERS PENSI ON FUND, et a l

.

In t h i s di rect ap p eal
, Den n i s Th o m as s eek s rev i ew o f t h e s u p eri o r co u rt ’ s fi n al

o rd er affi rm in g t h e d eci si o n o f t h e Ci t y o f At l an t a Fi refi g h ters Pen s i on Fu n d an d i t s Bo ard o f Tru s t ees t o den y Th o m as ’ cl ai m f o r ad di t i o n al p en s i on b en efi t s

. Un d er OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (1 ), h o wev er, ap p eal s fro m o rd ers o f s u p eri o r co u rt s rev i ewi n g

an ad m i ni s t rat i v e d eci s i on m u st b e i n i t i at ed b y fi l i n g an ap p l i cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary
ap p eal

. See Du n l a

p v. Ci t y o f A t l a n t a , 27 2 Ga. 5 2 3, 52 4 (5 31 SE2 d 7 0 2 ) (2 0 0 0 ).
Th o m as ’ fai l u re t o fo ll o w t h e req u i red ap p el l at e p ro ced u re d ep ri v es u s o f j u ri s d i ct i o n

o v er t h i s ap p eal , wh i ch is h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. January 30, 2020

01/30/2020
No. IV-13-008

Contact: Victor Dricks (817) 200-1128

 Lara Uselding (817) 200-1519

 

March 12, 2013

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC NAMES NEW RESIDENT INSPECTOR 

AT WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has selected Charles 

Peabody as the new senior resident inspector at the Wolf Creek nuclear 

plant in Burlington, Kan.

 “Charles Peabody’s background and regulatory experience will 

assist the NRC in carrying out its mission of protecting people and the 

environment and ensuring the safe operation of nuclear power plants,” 

said NRC Region IV Administrator Elmo E. Collins.

Peabody joined the NRC’s Region II office in Atlanta, Ga., in 

2003, and performed engineering inspections for the Division of Reactor Safety. Since then he 

has served as the Resident Inspector at Wolf Creek. Peabody holds a bachelor’s degree in nuclear 

and radiological engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Each U.S. commercial nuclear plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve 

as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections and monitoring significant 

work projects. Because Peabody was promoted from the resident inspector position, the NRC 

will be assigning a new resident inspector in the near future.

The Wolf Creek resident inspectors can be reached at: 620-364-8653.

###

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV

 1600 E. Lamar Blvd.

 Arlington, TX 76011-4511

Telephone: (817) 860-8100

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67950]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25864]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Steel Joist Institute

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 17, 2004, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Steel Joist Institute 
(``SJI'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the 
name and principal place of business of the standards development 
organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development 
activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: Steel Joist 
Institute, Myrtle Beach, SC. The nature and scope of SJI's standards 
development activities are: Continually develop standard specifications 
for the steel joist industry through the American National Standards 
Institute through consensus balloting.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-25864 Filed 11-19-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### §6921. Establishment, composition, and meetings

(a) Establishment.—There is a National Visitor Facilities Advisory Commission.

(b) Composition.—

(1) Membership.—The Commission is composed of—

(A) the Secretary of the Interior;

(B) the Administrator of General Services;

(C) the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution;

(D) the Chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission;

(E) the Chairman of the Commission of Fine Arts;

(F) six Members of the Senate, three from each party, to be appointed by the President of the Senate;

(G) six Members of the House of Representatives, three from each party, to be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and

(H) three individuals appointed by the President, at least two of whom shall not be officers of the Federal Government, and one member of whom shall be a representative of the District of Columbia government.

(2) Chairman.—The Secretary of the Interior serves as the Chairman of the Commission.

(3) Service of non-federal members.—Non-federal members serve at the pleasure of the President.

(c) Meetings.—The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairman.

(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1203.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 6921(a) | 40:821 (related to creation). | Pub. L. 90–264, title II, §§201 (related to creation), 202(a), Mar. 12, 1968, 82 Stat. 45. |
| 6921(b)(1) | 40:822(a) (1st sentence). | |
| 6921(b)(2) | 40:822(a) (3d sentence). | |
| 6921(b)(3) | 40:822(a) (2d sentence). | |
| 6921(c) | 40:822(a) (last sentence). | |

Section

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Termination of Advisory Commissions

Advisory commissions established after Jan. 5, 1973, to terminate not later than the expiration of the 2-year period beginning on the date of their establishment, unless, in the case of a commission established by the President or an officer of the Federal Government, such commission is renewed by appropriate action prior to the expiration of such 2-year period, or in the case of a commission established by the Congress, its duration is otherwise provided by law. See sections 1001(2) and 1013 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
### Part A—General Nuclear Matters
[4910-13-P]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NC\fRREN~1,s ROUTINe; SYMROL 14 CFR Part 39 Federal Aviation Administration



# oY3L-f IDocket No. FAA-201O~*****; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-221-AD} RlN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; BAE SYSTEMS (Operation) Limited Model BAe 146-10 and -200A Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), D T. ACTION: Notice ofproposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt anew airworthiness directive (AD) for the product listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory ontinuing airworthiness 

# -Po f:,. 5'. 

# '0 ""l>TIMi

S l 

## SO\-AEb- "

~ DAIT 

# ~hlo

•OI.fTING sYMOOL 

## AN/'l-W INITIALSiS1G 

# c.~ D"TE

• TIAl,SiSIG 

# m~l1
" 

# f/ Z

## 3j,o ROUTrNG SYMIlOL 

### AiJ.M -

# we 

# 41

# P;S;l'fi?~ ~ m The operation ofthe airbrake lever inthe "airbr es out" to «lift spoiler" range has been the subject oftwo occurrence Tep~rts.The lift spoilers on the BAe 146and Avro 146-RJ aeroplanes have ~een designed to deploy on landing to provide aerodynamic braking and tlodump lift to ensure that the wheel brakes can provide the necessary spee, reduction. 

## * * * 

## * * 

## * * The effects ofdeceleration and landing inertia lords can cause uncommanded movement ofthe airbrake selector lever from the "lift spoiler" position tothe "airbrakes out" position, pausing the lift spoilers to retract during the landing roll. This condition, ifrot corrected, would increase the landing distance, possibly resulting m arunway ovenun and consequent injury to aeroplane occupants. condition as: information (MeAl) originated by an aviation-authority of another country to identify 

### J 

## 01 I l7 I 

# AjJ~'":"wt and correct anunsafe condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe INITIAU>'SlG 

# II 'hr9\)~,- OATE 

# '-I 1'//0 

# .1~;q~L /D(



## * * * 

## * * 

## * *
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2438 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 551
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2438

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 5, 2003

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                              June 7, 2004

               Reported by Ms. Collins, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 115 West Pine Street in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, as the ``Major 
            Henry A. Commiskey, Sr. Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 115 
West Pine Street in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Major Henry A. Commiskey, Sr. Post Office 
Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Major Henry A. Commiskey, 
Sr. Post Office Building''.

                                                       Calendar No. 551

108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2438

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 115 West Pine Street in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, as the ``Major 
            Henry A. Commiskey, Sr. Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              June 7, 2004

                       Reported without amendment
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-12-00556-CR

Jesse CUELLAR,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009CR7135

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 11, 2013

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

In June 2009, appellant Jesse Cuellar was indicted on eight counts of indecency with a 

child by contact. He pled not guilty. A jury found Cuellar guilty of all eight counts and assessed 

punishment as follows: twelve years imprisonment and a $1,500 fine on counts 1, 2, 5 and 8; 

twenty years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine on counts 3 and 4; and fifteen years imprisonment

and a $5,000 fine on counts 6 and 7. The trial court ordered all sentences to run concurrently. 

Cuellar then perfected this appeal. 
04-12-00556-CR

Cuellar’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which 

he raises no arguable points of error and concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The 

brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 

S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1969). Cuellar was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was informed 

of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Cuellar did not file a brief. 

After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with 

counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Cuellar’s counsel and affirm the 

trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 

1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). 

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Cuellar wish to seek further review of this 

case in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for 

discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for 

discretionary review must be filed within thirty days after either the day our judgment is rendered 

or the day the last timely motion for rehearing or timely motion for en banc reconsideration is 

overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be 

filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for 

discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Do Not Publish

- 2 -
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17D0242. IN RE: ESTATE OF JIMMY DARRYL BANKS.

Jimmy D. Banks, Jr., has filed an application for discretionary appeal, seeking

review of an order of the Meriwether County Probate Court granting a motion to

establish ownership of property in this estate administration proceeding. OCGA

§ 15-9-123 (a) provides that any party to a civil case in probate court shall have the

right of appeal to this Court or the Supreme Court. A “probate court” for purposes

of this statute, however, is defined, in relevant part, as “a probate court of a county

having a population of more than 90,000 persons according to the United States

decennial census of 2010 or any future such census.” OCGA § 15-9-120 (2). As the

Meriwether County Probate Court does not meet this requirement, § 15-9-123 (a) is

not applicable to appeals from the rulings and judgments of that court. See 2010

Census, OCGA Vol. 42A, 2016 Supp., p. 60 (listing a 2010 population of 21,992 for

Meriwether County). Instead, OCGA § 5-3-2 (a) vests the superior court with

appellate jurisdiction over any probate court decision other than an order appointing

a temporary administrator. Appellate jurisdiction in this case thus is controlled by

§ 5-3-2 (a), and not by § 15-9-123 (a).

The Georgia Constitution provides that “[a]ny court shall transfer to the

appropriate court in the state any civil case in which it determines that jurisdiction or

venue lies elsewhere.” Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. I, Par. VIII; Bosma v.

Gunter, 258 Ga. 664, 665 (373 SE2d 368) (1988). Although appellate jurisdiction in

this action lies in the superior court as a general matter, an appeal under § 5-3-2 is

available only from a final judgment. See Driver v. State, 198 Ga. App. 643, 644

(402 SE2d 524) (1991) (no right of appeal to the superior court lies from an

February 02, 2017
interlocutory ruling in the probate court); Sears v. State, 196 Ga. App. 207, 207 (396

SE2d 1) (1990) (same). The probate court’s order here is not a final judgment, as the

estate administration proceeding remains pending before that court. Consequently,

because there is no court in which appellate jurisdiction over the probate court’s order

lies, this application is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

02/02/2017