alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Alan M. Goldston, as Assignee of Goldston & Schwab, LLP Respondent-Appellant, v Bandwidth Technology Corp. et al., Appellants-Respondents.

[820 NYS2d 883]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered October 7, 2005, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment dismissing defendants’ *748second and sixth affirmative defenses, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Among the numerous issues of fact precluding summary judgment are whether the contract was a “general retainer” *(Atkins & O’Brien v ISS Intl. Serv. Sys.,*252 AD2d 446, 448 [1998]; *cf. Matter of Cooperman,*83 NY2d 465, 476 [1994]) and thus exempt from the rule limiting attorneys to recovery in quantum meruit *(Greenberg v Remick & Co.,*230 NY 70 [1920]; *Ehrlich v Rebco Ins. Exch.,*198 AD2d 58 [1993]), whether plaintiffs firm substantially performed the contract, and whether defendants waived any objection to the replacement of plaintiffs firm by plaintiff personally, after his partner had withdrawn from the firm. In view of record evidence showing that corporate formalities were dispensed with in the management of defendant closely held start-up corporations, an issue of fact is also raised as to whether Bandwidth Technology’s president had authority to enter into a contract providing for the compensation of plaintiff with company stock *(see Leslie, Semple & Garrison v Gavit & Co.,*81 AD2d 950, 951 [1981]; *Palmerton v Envirogas, Inc.,*80 AD2d 996, 997 [1981]; *see also Matter of Bahar v Schwartzreich,*204 AD2d 441 [1994]).

We have considered the parties’ remaining arguments for affirmative relief and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Williams and McGuire, JJ.

Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied; clarification granted, and the decision and order of this Court entered on June 20, 2006 (30 AD3d 280 [2006]) recalled and vacated and a new decision and order substituted therefor.
Consent of Austin M. O'Toole

     The consent of AUSTIN M. O'TOOLE, Esq., Senior Vice President and Secretary
of The Coastal Corporation, is contained in his opinion filed as Exhibit 5 to
this Registration Statement.


                                                                    FORM S-8/ 91
Exhibit 12
 Statements re: computation of ratios
 For the six months
    
    
    For the year ended
    
    
    For the year ended
    
    
    For the year ended
    
    
    For the year ended
    
    
    For the year endedended June 30, 2010
    
    
    December 31, 2009
    
    
    December 31, 2008
    
    
    December 31, 2007
    
    
    December 31, 2006
    
    
    December 31, 2005Net income from continuing operations
    
    $
    2,092,784
    
    
    $
    4,399,948
    
    
    $
    4,873,021
    
    
    $
    5,958,214
    
    
    $
    3,284,957
    
    
    $
    3,436,149Add: fixed charges
    
    
    10,711,924
    
    
    
    22,000,728
    
    
    
    20,963,484
    
    
    
    15,670,067
    
    
    
    11,490,476
    
    
    
    2,494,245Less: preferred and senior common distributions
    
    
    (2,047,251
    )
    
    
    (4,093,750
    )
    
    
    (4,093,750
    )
    
    
    (4,093,750
    )
    
    
    (2,186,890
    )
    
    
    Earnings
    
    $
    10,757,457
    
    
    $
    22,306,926
    
    
    $
    21,742,755
    
    
    $
    17,534,531
    
    
    $
    12,588,543
    
    
    $
    5,930,394Fixed Charges:Interest expense
    
    
    8,113,293
    
    
    
    16,398,938
    
    
    
    15,574,735
    
    
    
    10,847,346
    
    
    
    8,041,412
    
    
    
    2,187,586Amortization of deferred financing fees
    
    
    544,080
    
    
    
    1,495,598
    
    
    
    1,283,952
    
    
    
    717,195
    
    
    
    1,207,198
    
    
    
    260,098Estimated interest component of rent
    
    
    7,300
    
    
    
    12,442
    
    
    
    11,047
    
    
    
    11,776
    
    
    
    54,976
    
    
    
    46,561Preferred and senior common distributions
    
    
    2,047,251
    
    
    
    4,093,750
    
    
    
    4,093,750
    
    
    
    4,093,750
    
    
    
    2,186,890
    
    
    
    Total fixed charges and preferred distributions
    
    
    10,711,924
    
    
    
    22,000,728
    
    
    
    20,963,484
    
    
    
    15,670,067
    
    
    
    11,490,476
    
    
    
    2,494,245Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions
    
    
    1.0
    
    
    
    1.0
    
    
    
    1.0
    
    
    
    1.1
    
    
    
    1.1
    
    
    
    2.4
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN DAVID MITCHELL,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR

FORCE, JOINT BASE

ELMENDORF/RICHARDSON, 732 AIR

MOBILITY SQUADRON,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 12-35322

D.C. No. 3:10-cv-0263-TMB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Alaska

Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 14, 2013

Anchorage, Alaska

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

The record reveals sufficient evidence to support the district court’s

conclusion that an authorized employee or officer appointed Mitchell to his

position and that he performed a federal function in the course of his employment

FILED

SEP 11 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
with the government. See 5 U.S.C. § 2105(a). The form used to memorialize

Mitchell’s employment references his appointee status multiple times, and an

authorized designee of the Secretary of the Air Force appointed Mitchell to his

position. 5 U.S.C. § 2105(a)(1)(C)–(D); see 5 U.S.C. § 302(b)(1) (“[T]he head of

an agency may delegate to subordinate officials the authority . . . to take final

action on matters pertaining to the employment, direction, and general

administration of personnel under his agency.”). This conforms with the statutory

requirements for appointment. 5 U.S.C. § 2105(a)(1)(C)–(D). Finally, his work as

an Air Force employee handling cargo at a military base is a federal function under

5 U.S.C. § 2105(a)(2). 

AFFIRMED.

2
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ LEXOS MEDIA IP, LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

EBAY, INC., Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2024

- 1852

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:23

- cv

- 06314

- RFL, Judge Rita F. Lin.

______________________
ON MOTION

______________________
Before L OURIE , H UGHES , and S TARK , Circuit Judges

. P ER C URIAM

. O R D E R
Due to settlement, Lexos Media IP, LLC moves unopposed to dismiss this appeal as moot and to vacate the district court’s underlying judgment and order. Alternatively, Lexos Media moves to remand this appeal with instructions that the district court consider a motion to vacate. Case: 24-1852 Document: 12 Page: 1 Filed: 09/11/2024LEXOS MEDIA IP , LLC v. EBAY , INC

. 2

Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) The motion is granted to the extent that the appeal is remanded

. In granting the motion, this court takes noposition as to whether the district court should grant vacatur. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

September 11 , 2024 Date F OR THE C OURT

cc: United States District Court for the Northern District of California Case: 24-1852 Document: 12 Page: 2 Filed: 09/11/2024
### §15851. Assessment of renewable energy resources

#### (a) Resource assessment

Not later than 6 months after August 8, 2005, and each year thereafter, the Secretary shall review the available assessments of renewable energy resources within the United States, including solar, wind, biomass, marine, geothermal, and hydroelectric energy resources, and undertake new assessments as necessary, taking into account changes in market conditions, available technologies, and other relevant factors.

#### (b) Contents of reports

Not later than 1 year after August 8, 2005, and each year thereafter, the Secretary shall publish a report based on the assessment under subsection (a). The report shall contain—

(1) a detailed inventory describing the available amount and characteristics of the renewable energy resources; and

(2) such other information as the Secretary believes would be useful in developing such renewable energy resources, including descriptions of surrounding terrain, population and load centers, nearby energy infrastructure, location of energy and water resources, and available estimates of the costs needed to develop each resource, together with an identification of any barriers to providing adequate transmission for remote sources of renewable energy resources to current and emerging markets, recommendations for removing or addressing such barriers, and ways to provide access to the grid that do not unfairly disadvantage renewable or other energy producers.

#### (c) Authorization of appropriations

For the purposes of this section, there are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title II, §201, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 650; Pub. L. 116–260, div. Z, title III, §3006(b)(1), Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2512.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2020—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 116–260 substituted "marine" for "ocean (including tidal, wave, current, and thermal)".
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 71064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26892]



[[Page 71064]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel, Career Development Applications.
    Date: December 14, 2004.
    Time: 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Anne Krey, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health 
and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 435-6908.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 30, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-26892 Filed 12-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### James A. Andrews, Respondent, v. 98 Montague, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Appeal by defendants Alpert and Sherman from a resettled order which denied their motion to dismiss the complaint under rules 102 and 103, subdivision 4 of rule 106, and subdivisions 5 and 8 of rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Appeal by defendant, 98 Montague, Inc., from an order denying its motion to dismiss the complaint and the two causes of action contained therein for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or in the alternative to strike out paragraphs and portions of paragraphs thereof. On appeal by defendants Alpert and Sherman, resettled order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The first cause of action is substantially the same as the third cause of action which was held sufficient in *Andrews*v. *Lebis*(280 App. Div. 940 [two cases]); and it cannot be said, as a matter of law, that it is barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations contained in subdivision 7 of section 49 of the Civil Practice Act (cf. *Andrews*v. *Lebis,*278 App. Div. 858, 1005). While the second cause of action is insufficient for the reasons stated with respect to the fourth cause of action in *Andrews*v. *Lebis*(279 App. Div. 1013), it was not error to deny the motion by these defendants to dismiss the complaint, which was directed to the complaint as a whole and not to each cause of action. Under such circumstances, the motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action must be denied if either cause of action is sufficient. *{Advance Music Corp.*v. *American Tobacco Co.,*296 N. Y. 79; *Fusco*v. *Brooks,*263 App. Div. 845; *Halstead*v. *General My. Signal Co.,*268 App. Div. 1060; *Schauder*v. *Weiss,*274 App. Div. 940; *Log Cabin Mest*v. *Alpine Wine & Liquor Corp.,*280 App. Div. 943.) Appeal by defendant 98 Montague, Inc., dismissed, without costs, that defendant not having appeared or filed a brief. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, MaeCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur. [See 283 App. Div. 669.]
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SRM-SECY-16-0040: Closure of Petition for Rulemaking, C-10 Research and Education Foundation, Inc. (PRM-72-6; NRC-2008-0649)

Accession Number: ML16141A089

Date Released: Monday, June 27, 2016

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML16141A091 - SRM-SECY-16-0040: Closure of Petition for Rulemaking, C-10 Research and Education Foundation, Inc. (PRM-72-6; NRC-2008-0649). (1 page(s), 5/19/2016)
    - ML16141A127 - SRM-SECY-16-0040:  Changes to the Federal Register Notice in SECY-16-0040 (Encl. 1). (16 page(s), 5/19/2016)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
<PAGE>
                                                                       Ex. 10.35

        ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER FOR PARTICIPATION OF CALL OPTION AGREEMENT

SHANGHAI FOCUS MEDIA CO., LTD., (registered address: Room A65, 28 Floor, No.369,
Jiangsu Road, Changning District, Shanghai) (hereinafter the "PARTICIPANT
SHAREHOLDER"), and SHENZHEN BIANJIE BUILDING ADVERTISEMENT CO., LTD. (registered
address: Room 1020, A, Wangxing Square, 38 Hongli Rd., Shenzhen) (hereinafter
the "NEW TARGET COMPANY"), as independent party, hereby agree to participate in
the Call Option Agreement among FOCUS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY (SHANGHAI) CO., LTD.,
SHANGHAI FOCUS MEDIA ADVERTISEMENT CO., LTD. and other relevant parties
(hereinafter, "CALL OPTION AGREEMENT") dated March 28 2005. The Participant
Shareholder hereby grant Focus Media Technology with an irrevocable equity Call
Option (hereinafter "CALL OPTION") in respect to 1% of the equity share of New
Target Company held by this company. Once this Acknowledgement Letter is
executed by this company, the New Target Company and the newly increase equity
share begin to be the "Target Company" and "Option Equity" defined under the
Call Option Agreement (hereinafter the "CALL OPTION AGREEMENT") entered into
between this company, Focus Media Technology and other relevant parties dated
March 28 2005; and this company immediately make the same representations and
warranties in respect to the New Target Company and relevant equity Call Option
as this company made under the Call Option Agreement in respect to the defined
Target Company and Call Option and undertake the same obligations therein.


<PAGE>

SHANGHAI FOCUS MEDIA CO., LTD.
(Company chop)


Signature by: /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              --------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Legal Representative
Date: January 13, 2006


SHENZHEN BIANJIE BUILDING ADVERTISEMENT
CO., LTD.
(Company chop)


Signature by: /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              --------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Legal Representative
Date: January 13, 2006


FOCUS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY (SHANGHAI) CO.,
LTD.
(Company chop)


Signature by: /s/ Jason Nanchun Jiang
              --------------------------
Name: Jason Nanchun Jiang
Position: Legal Representative
Date: January 13, 2006


                                        2
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 233 (Monday, December 6, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 70469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26700]



[[Page 70469]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1564-DR]


New York; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of New York (FEMA-1564-DR), dated October 1, 2004, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 16, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this disaster is now August 13, 2004, through and including 
September 16, 2004.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 
Assistance; 97.048, Individual and Household Housing; 97.049, 
Individual and Household Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 
Individual and Household Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)


Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 04-26700 Filed 12-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed April 7, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-277

Lower Tribunal No. 18-41649

________________

Ugo Colombo, et al.,

Appellants,

vs.

Dacra Development, Corporation, et al.,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michael A. 

Hanzman, Judge.

Coffey Burlington, P.L., and Jeffrey B. Crockett; Cole Scott & Kissane, 

P.A., Thomas E. Scott, and Daryl Greenberg, for appellants.

Kula & Associates, P.A., Elliot B. Kula and William D. Mueller; Richard 

and Richard, P.A., and Dennis Richard, for appellees.

Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. See Phillips v. Garcia, 147 So. 3d 569 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) 

(Recognizing that the trial court is in a superior position to determine whether 

the party or its counsel knew or should have known that the claim or defense 

asserted was not supported by the facts or the applicable law and concluding 

that the appellate court will reverse only if the record reflects that no 

reasonable trial judge could have denied the motion for sanctions under 

Florida Statute 57.105.).
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

December 8, 2016 

IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

 REFER TO: M161129 

MEMORANDUM TO: Victor M. McCree 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – BRIEFING ON URANIUM 

RECOVERY, 9:00 A.M., TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2016, 

COMMISSIONERS’ CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT 

NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC 

ATTENDANCE) 

The Commission was briefed by external panelists and the NRC staff on the status and issues 

associated with the licensing and oversight of uranium recovery facilities. The external panelists 

were Reid Nelson, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation; Yufna Soldier Wolf, Tribal Historic 

Preservation Office, Northern Arapaho Tribe; Todd Parfitt, Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality; Katie Sweeney, National Mining Association; and Geoffrey Fettus, 

Natural Resources Defense Council. 

There were no requirements identified for staff action. 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Baran 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OIG 

 OPA 

 ODs, RAs, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
**MENU**
Foreword
Introduction

Badges

Insignia

Arrowhead patch

Belt

Buttons

Cap insignia

Collar ornaments

Hat

Hatband & straps

Nametags

Service insignia

Sleeve brassards

Tie ornaments & pins

Optional

Conclusion

Photofile

Notes
#### § 230.491 Information to be furnished under paragraph (6) of Schedule B.

Any foreign government filing a registration statement pursuant to Schedule B of the act need state, in furnishing the information required by paragraph (6), the names and addresses only of principal underwriters, namely, underwriters in privity of contract with the registrant, provided they are designated as principal underwriters and a brief statement is made as to the discounts and commissions to be received by sub-underwriters or dealers.

[84 FR 12721, Apr. 2, 2019]