alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.41


 


AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Amendment”) is entered into
by and between ROBERT F. VENTEICHER (“Executive”) and Affymax, Inc.
(the “Company”),
effective as of September 23, 2010 (the “Effective Date”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company retains the services of Executive
pursuant to that certain Employment Agreement dated December 17, 2008 (the
“Employment Agreement”),
and the Company and Executive wish to amend the Employment Agreement as set
forth below;


 


WHEREAS, the Company desires to continue to employ Executive
pursuant to the Employment Agreement, as herein amended;


 


WHEREAS, Executive wishes to continue to be employed by the
Company and provide personal services to the Company in return for certain compensation
and benefits under the Employment Agreement, as herein amended; and


 


WHEREAS, Section 11.4 of the Employment Agreement
provides that it cannot be modified or amended except in a writing signed by an
officer of the Company.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants contained herein, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties
hereto as follows:


 


1.             Clause
(iv) of Section 5.6(b) of the Employment Agreement is hereby
amended by replacing the phrase “one (1) year” with the phrase “thirty-six
(36) months.”


 


2.             In
all other respects, the Employment Agreement shall remain unchanged by this
Amendment.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed
this Amendment on the dates written below.


 


	
  ROBERT F. VENTEICHER

  	
   

  	
  AFFYMAX, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/
  Robert Venteicher

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/
  Arlene M. Morris

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Date:
  4 Oct 2010

  	
   

  	
  Its:
  Chief Executive Officer

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Date: 9-23-2010
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

1. REAL PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS

IDENTIFIED BY MENDOCINO COUNTY APN

051-290-04, 051-300-02, 051-310-01, 051-320-01,

2. REAL PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS

IDENTIFIED BY MENDOCINO COUNTY APN

051-180-08, 051-190-05, 052-010-01, 052-010-03,

052-010-09, 052-010-14, 052-010-15, 052-010-16,

052-010-17; REAL PROPERTY AND

IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED BY

HUMBOLDT COUNTY APN 222-024-003,

222-025-003;

3. REAL PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS

IDENTIFIED BY MENDOCINO COUNTY APN

051-180-09, 051-180-10

Defendants. /

PAUL SAYERS, GRAESON PRESCOTT,

DIANA MENDES AND BARNUM TIMBER

COMPANY,

Claimants. /

No. C 08-03093 WHA

______________________________

No. CR09-01134 CRB

No. CR09-01135 MHP

No. CR09-01140 MHP

No. CR09-01141 CRB

No. CR09-01142 JSW

No. CR09-01143 SI

ORDER DECLINING TO

RELATE CRIMINAL CASES

Judge Jeffrey White has declined to relate the above-numbered criminal cases to his civil

forfeiture case. This order does likewise with respect to the civil forfeiture action pending before

the undersigned. 

Case 3:08-cv-03093-WHA Document 78 Filed 02/08/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

It is curious that these criminal matters have all been filed separately and were not even

related enough to each other to have been brought in a single action. Most of all, the tail would

wag the dog for either of the civil forfeiture cases — which have both been stayed without

activity due to these criminal proceedings — to serve as a basis to disturb the regular assignment

of criminal cases. In sum, the above-numbered criminal cases are not related under Criminal

Local Rule 8-1(b) to the civil forfeiture action pending before the undersigned.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-03093-WHA Document 78 Filed 02/08/10 Page 2 of 2
Case 3:08-cv-01018-CRB Document 5 Filed 03/03/10 Page 1 of 2Case 3:08-cv-01018-CRB Document 5 Filed 03/03/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statement of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      49,356,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  283,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            57,476,000
<PP&E>                                       3,743,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              88,167,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,205,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           59,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 183,742,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                88,167,000
<SALES>                                         38,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            17,758,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (17,285,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (17,285,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (17,285,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.31)


</TABLE>
§ 301.2 Requests for mandatory declassification review. ( a ) All information originally classified by the Peace Corps shall be subject to review for declassification.
( b ) Requests for review of such information for declassification shall be in writing, addressed to the Peace Corps Director of Security, Peace Corps, Washington, DC 20526, and reasonably describe the information sought with sufficient specificity to enable its location with a reasonable amount of effort. Only requests made by a United States citizen or a permanent resident alien, a Federal agency or a State or local government will be considered.
( c ) Requests relating to information, either derivatively classified by the Peace Corps or originally classified by another agency but in the possession of the Peace Corps, shall be forwarded, together with a copy of the record, to the originating agency. The transmittal may contain in Peace Corps recommendation for action.
#### In the Matter of Proving the Last Will and Testament of Lela DeVoe, Late of the City of Schenectady, N. Y., Deceased.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, unless the appellant files and serves an undertaking within twenty days, and pays ten dollars costs of motion; if such undertaking is filed and served and costs paid, the motion is denied, without costs.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Sixteenth census of the UnitedStates: 1940: population: families: family wage or salary income in 1939;regions and cities of 1,000,000 or more**
 
Parts: 0102
 
SuDoc Number:C 3.940-2:P 81/24
Item Number:0198 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001104658
 
August 21, 2019
Case 3:08-cv-01800-CRB Document 11 Filed 03/03/10 Page 1 of 2Case 3:08-cv-01800-CRB Document 11 Filed 03/03/10 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**JOHN A. SPANOS,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 177 WAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 28th day of October, 2015, the Petition for A llowance of Appeal** 

**is** DENIED

**.**
#### Kent *v.*Geiger *et al.,*relators.

June 12, 1912.

From Montgomery superior court. Motion to dismiss.

*W. W. Bennett,*for. plaintiff in error. *Eschol Graham, F. H. Saffold, E. J. Giles,*and *W. G. Davis,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

A bill of exceptions, having been tendered to the trial j ridge for certification on a given date, was returned by him to counsel for plaintiff in .error for correction, and was certified at a date thirty-four days later. The certified bill of exceptions contained ten typewritten pages. In the absence of any statement as to the cause of delay, it must be held that such delay was unreasonable, and therefore that the bill of exceptions must be dismissed. *Mulling*v. *Exchange Bank of Waycross,*137 *Ga.*431 (73 S. E. 654).

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Cooke, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County, rendered June 8, 1977, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty of rape in the first degree. The defendant, with two others, was charged with rape in the first degree, two counts of sodomy in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in the first degree. At his arraignment defendant pleaded not guilty to the various counts, but on May 25, 1977 defendant withdrew his former plea and pleaded guilty to the crime of rape in the first degree in full satisfaction of the entire indictment. On June 8, 1977, the date for sentencing, defendant sought leave to withdraw his plea based upon alleged misrepresentation of his assigned counsel and his claim of innocence. The application was denied and defendant was sentenced to a previously agreed term of imprisonment of from 0 to 12 years. The record indicates that at the time the defendant entered his plea he stated that he did so freely and voluntarily, without duress of any kind, and that he was guilty of the crime charged. In response to questions asked by the Judge and after being sworn by the court, the defendant set forth facts which constituted proof of the crimes charged in the indictment. At the sentencing some two weeks later before the same Judge, the defendant urged that the misrepresentations were that the other two codefendants were not taking "the cop out and one wasn’t sure about the other one”. The record shows that the other two codefendants did enter pleas. Defendant admitted to the court that he did state facts under oath which constituted the crime charged but “I’m denying it now”. The court refused permission to withdraw the plea and this appeal ensued. Permission to withdraw a plea rests in the sound discretion of the court (GPL 220.60). Such pleas of guilty may not be *1061withdrawn unless there is some evidence or claim of innocence, fraud, or mistake in inducing the plea *(People v Malinowski,*37 AD2d 662). When the defendant sought to withdraw his guilty plea at the sentencing proceeding, he did not allege innocence, but merely stated that, although he had admitted his guilt before, he was denying it at that time. Even if the statement made by the defendant could be considered a claim of innocence, there was no factual support for his new claim of innocence. The court was thus presented with defendant’s detailed statement, made under oath, of the facts which constitute unequivocal guilt of the crimes charged in the indictment and his subsequent unsupported statement that "I’m denying it now”. Such bare allegations do not lend support for a withdrawal of a plea *(People v Dixon,*29 NY2d 55; *People v Toliver,*29 AD2d 210). Defendant’s allegations that misrepresentations were made to him by his attorney are simply not borne out by the record. Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2659 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2659

    To provide grants to States to improve sex offender registries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 26, 2005

 Mr. Boswell introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To provide grants to States to improve sex offender registries.

    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 ``Safe Children Safe Communities 
Act''.

SEC. 2. GRANTS AUTHORIZED.

    (a) In General.--From amounts made available to carry out this 
section, the Attorney General shall make grants to States to be used by 
each State to implement better and more comprehensive sex offender 
registries and tracking systems.
    (b) Amounts Based on Population.--For each State, the amount 
granted to that State shall be determined based on the population of 
that State.
    (c) State Defined.--In this section, the term ``State'' includes 
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, 
American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and any other 
territory or possession of the United States.
    (d) Set-Aside for Coordination.--Of the amounts made available to 
carry out this section, the Attorney General may use not more than 2 
percent to provide assistance to States in coordinating the activities 
carried out under this section.
    (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated for grants under this section $300,000,000 for fiscal year 
2006 and such sums as may be necessary for each fiscal year thereafter.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Aaron Jackson, Appellant.

— Judgment insofar as it imposes sentence unanimously reversed, on the law, and matter remitted to Erie County Court for resentencing, and otherwise judgment affirmed. Memorandum: While at the time of the imposition of the sentence, the court did offer defendant’s counsel an opportunity to make a statement, which he did, no similar opportunity was offered to defendant as required by CPL 380.50. Although literal compliance with that statute is not necessary (see *People v McClain,*35 NY2d 483), the complete failure here to advise defendant of his right to speak necessitates a finding that the statute was not even substantially complied with *(People v Wade,*49 AD2d 770; *People v Rizzo,*41 AD2d 691). (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court — robbery, second degree.) Present — Moule, J. P., Simons, Dillon and Witmer, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                                                 5
       
<S>                                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                    MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                                           11,752,011
<SECURITIES>                                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       661,051
<ALLOWANCES>                                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 13,994,000
<PP&E>                                                          104,064,939
<DEPRECIATION>                                                    4,541,660
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  130,439,495
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             9,306,089
<BONDS>                                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                             105
<COMMON>                                                            118,833
<OTHER-SE>                                                       85,549,417
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    130,439,495
<SALES>                                                          10,035,805
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 10,597,818
<CGS>                                                             4,240,239
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     9,729,528
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                1,671,070
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    (585,732)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                (585,732)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       (964,357)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          (.10)
        


</TABLE>
§ 518.14 Special award conditions. ( a ) Federal awarding agencies may impose additional requirements as needed, if an applicant or recipient: ( 1 ) Has a history of poor performance,
( 2 ) Is not financially stable,
( 3 ) Has a management system that does not meet the standards prescribed in this part,
( 4 ) Has not conformed to the terms and conditions of a previous award, or
( 5 ) Is not otherwise responsible.
( b ) Additional requirements may only be imposed provided that such applicant or recipient is notified in writing as to: ( 1 ) The nature of the additional requirements,
( 2 ) The reason why the additional requirements are being imposed,
( 3 ) The nature of the corrective action needed,
( 4 ) The time allowed for completing the corrective actions, and
( 5 ) The method for requesting reconsideration of the additional requirements imposed.
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Please use the following title

FAA Final Regulatory Evaluation
#### § 513.210 Voluntary exclusion.

Persons who accept voluntary exclusions under § 513.315 are excluded in accordance with the terms of their settlements. Broadcasting Board of Governors shall, and participants may, contact the original action agency to ascertain the extent of the exclusion.
### §§4414 to 4420. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–288, title VII, §703, formerly title VI, §603, May 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 164; renumbered title VII, §703, Pub. L. 103–337, div. C, title XXXIV, §3411(a)(1), (2), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 3100

Section 4414, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §204, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1748, related to use of local firms and individuals.

Section 4415, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §205, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1748, related to Federal grant-in-aid programs.

Section 4416, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §206, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1749, related to State disaster plans.

Section 4417, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §207, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1749, related to use and coordination of relief organizations.

Section 4418, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §208, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1750, related to restriction on duplication of benefits.

Section 4419, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §209, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1750, related to nondiscrimination restrictions in disaster assistance.

Section 4420, Pub. L. 91–606, title II, §210, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1750, related to disaster warnings.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Apr. 1, 1974, see section 605 of Pub. L. 93–288, formerly set out as an Effective Date note under section 5121 of this title.
§ 3.8 Approval of retention of gifts or decorations with employing agency for official use. ( a ) At the request of an overseas post or an office within the employing agency, a gift or decoration deemed to have been accepted on behalf of the United States may be retained for official use. Such retention should be approved: ( 1 ) For the Department of State, by the Chief of Protocol;
( 2 ) For IDCA, by AID's Director of Management Operations;
( 3 ) For AID, by the Director of Management Operations; and
( 4 ) For USICA, by the Associate Director for Management. However, to qualify for such approval, the gift or decoration should be an item which can be used in the normal conduct of agency business, such as a rug or a tea service, or an art object meriting display, such as a painting or sculpture. Personal gift items, such as wristwatches, jewelry, or wearing apparel, should not be regarded as suitable for “official use”. Only under unusual circumstances will retention of a decoration for official use be authorized. Every effort should be made to place each “official use” item in a location that will afford the largest number of employees, and, if feasible, members of the public, the maximum opportunity to receive the benefit of its display, provided the security of the location is adequate.
( b ) Items approved for official use must be accounted for and safeguarded as Federal property at all times under standard Federal property management procedures. Within 30 days after the official use of a gift has been terminated, the gift or decoration shall be deposited with the designated depository office of the employing agency to be held pending completion of disposal arrangements by the General Services Administration.