alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document
Exhibit 4.1  


BIMINI MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT, INC.  


See Reverse for

Certain Definitions  


98,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $.001 EACH

CLASS A COMMON STOCK  



	

This is to certify that	

	

is the owner of
	

FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF CLASS A COMMON STOCK OF

BIMINI MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT, INC.







Transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.
  


Witness, the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duty authorized officers.  



	Dated	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	

 Secretary	
 	

 	
 	

 President











BIMINI MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT, INC.  


        The
following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations: 



	TEN COM —	as tenants in common	 	UNIF TRANSFER MIN ACT—	 	
	 	Custodian	 	

	TEN ENT —	as tenants by the entireties	 	 	 	(Cust)	 	 	 	(Minor)
	JT TEN —	as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common	 	 	 	Under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	(State)




Additional
abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list: 


For value received,                        hereby sell, assign and transfer onto



	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE	
 	

 	
 	

 
	
	 	 	 	 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	


	(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE)
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

	
 	

 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	
shares
	

	
 	

 
	 Shares represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
	

 	
 	

 	
 	
Attorney
	

	
 	

 
	
to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.	
 	

 





	
Dated	
 	

 	
 	

 
	 	 	
	 	 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 





	 	 	

	 	 	Notice:	 	The signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as written upon the face of the certificate in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever.
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 













QuickLinks
#### Clifford Miner, Appellant, v. George Sherman, Respondent.

Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with $10 motion costs.
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

Laurence F. Padway (SBN 89314)

Gayle Godfrey Codiga (SBN 114715)

Law Offices of Laurence F. Padway

1516 Oak Street, Suite 109

Alameda, California 94501

Telephone: (510) 814-0680

Facsimile : (510) 814-0650

Attorneys for plaintiff

Nancy Langston

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY LANGSTON, No. C08-02560 SI

Plaintiff,

vs. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR

TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE AND 

NORTH AMERICAN ASSET [PROPOSED] ORDER AT MOTION

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR RECONSIDERATION

GROUP DISABILITY PLAN

Defendant. Date: April 7, 2010

Time: 3:30 p.m.

Hon. Susan Ilston

______________________________________/

A hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of Attorneys Fee Award is

scheduled to commence at 3:30 p.m. on April 7, 2010. Counsel for plaintiff undersigned is

scheduled to commence a jury trial on a non-ERISA long term disability case, Pralinsky v. Mutual of

Omaha Insurance Company, No. 8:09 CV 8 in the United States District Court for the District of

Nebraska on April 5, 2010. The case has a five to seven day trial estimate.

While it is possible the case will settle, it does not seem likely to do so at this time.

Because Nebraska is in a different time zone, that trial will be concluded for the day by the time that

the 3:30 p.m. hearing starts in this court on April 7. Accordingly, Laurence F. Padway, counsel for

plaintiff, requests permission to appear telephonically at the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for

Reconsideration of Attorneys Fee Award. The phone number for Mr. Padway is (510) 205-1821.

Case 3:08-cv-02560-SI Document 93 Filed 03/22/10 Page 1 of 2
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

Request for Telephonic Appearance i CASE NO. C08-02560

Dated: March 17, 2010

/s/_______________

Laurence F. Padway

Attorney for plaintiff

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 2010 By:

 Hon. Susan Illston

 United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02560-SI Document 93 Filed 03/22/10 Page 2 of 2
### §3796dd. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796dd was editorially reclassified as section 10381 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### §4366a. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 101–617, §4, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3287, which related to development of data base of environmental research articles indexed by geographic location, expired 10 years after Nov. 16, 1990, pursuant to section 6 of Pub. L. 101–617, formerly set out as a Termination Date note under this section.

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

#### Termination Date

Pub. L. 101–617, §6, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3287, provided that Pub. L. 101–617, which enacted this section and provisions formerly set out under this section, was to expire 10 years after Nov. 16, 1990.

#### Short Title; Findings; Purpose; Authorization

Pub. L. 101–617, §§1–3, 5, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3287, which provided that Pub. L. 101–617, which enacted this section and provisions formerly set out under this section, could be cited as the "Environmental Research Geographic Location Information Act", and further provided for findings, purpose to develop data base of environmental research articles indexed by geographic location, and authorization of appropriations, expired 10 years after Nov. 16, 1990, pursuant to section 6 of Pub. L. 101–617, formerly set out as a note under this section.
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

NUANCE COMMUNICATIONS, INC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ABBYY SOFTWARE HOUSE, ET AL., 

Defendants.

AND ALL RELATED CASES.

 /

No. C 08-02912 JSW

ORDER RE PRIOR ART

REFERENCES AND CASE

MANAGEMENT

On July 2, 2010, during the case management conference, this Court entered an order

requiring Defendants to identify no more than 20 prior art references prior to claim

construction. Since the time of that order, the Court has received three letters from the parties

contesting that ruling. The Court has reviewed the parties’ joint case management statement,

heard the oral argument, and reviewed the submitted letters. For the reasons set forth during the

case management conference, the Court maintains the current schedule. The parties must meet

and confer to arrive a mutually-agreeably schedule by no later than July 16, 2010, which shall

include the date for Defendants to provide their best prior art references prior to the Markman

process. To the extent this Court’s claim construction order provides good cause, Defendants

shall be permitted to exchange prior art terms, while presumptively maintaining the same

number of overall terms at issue. 

Case 3:08-cv-04942-JSW Document 121 Filed 07/09/10 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

To the extent the parties encounter difficult with determining precise interim dates and

deadlines in the claim construction process, including the deadline for Defendants to submit

their designated prior art references, the Court refers the parties to the Special Master for

assistance.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 9, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-04942-JSW Document 121 Filed 07/09/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from financial statements for the six month period ended
June 30, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          24,328
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,328
<PP&E>                                             666
<DEPRECIATION>                                      41
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,570
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,997
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,306
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,267
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,570
<SALES>                                            476
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   476
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,501
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (14,386)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,386)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,386)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
Opinion issued July 2, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-23-00734-CV

———————————

LATOYA TYLER, Appellant

V.

5410 N BRAESWOOD BLVD HOUSTON LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 4

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1205944

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, LaToya Tyler, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s 

September 27, 2023 final judgment. Appellant has failed to timely file a brief. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a) (governing time to file brief). 
2

The record in this appeal was originally due on or before November 27, 2023. 

The clerk’s record was filed on November 15, 2023, and the reporter’s record was 

filed on December 19, 2023. Accordingly, appellant’s brief was due to be filed on 

or before January 18, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellant did not file an 

appellant’s brief. 

On January 29, 2024, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that this appeal 

was subject to dismissal unless a brief, or a motion to extend time to file a brief, was 

filed within ten days of the notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (governing failure of 

appellant to file brief), 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of appeal for want of 

prosecution), 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case for failure to comply 

with notice from Clerk of Court). Despite the notice that this appeal was subject to 

dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX.R. APP. 

P. 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Landau, Countiss, and Guerra.
Georgetown University Boathouse

Environmental Assessment

National Park Service

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal

National Historical Park

April 2006
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.03
September 18, 2000

George Bell



Dear George,

On behalf of the Board of Directors, I am very pleased to inform you that the
Board has approved an increase in your total targeted cash compensation. Your
base compensation will be adjusted to $400,000 per year. This adjustment is
effective as of August 16, 2000.

In addition to your base salary compensation, you will continue to be a
participant in the Excite@Home Executive Incentive Plan. Your annual incentive
target has been increased to 60% of your base salary ($240,000 for fiscal year
2000). Your total compensation (assuming 100% payout of EIP) is $640,000.

In addition, the Board of Directors has approved a stock option for you to
purchase 400,000 shares if Series A Common Stock. This stock option grant was
approved on August 16, 2000 at that day's closing price of $13.5625. Your
right to purchase your option shares will be subject to a four-year vesting
schedule that provides for vesting at the rate of 2.083% per month over the
next forty-eight months. The vesting commences immediately (no cliff).

The Board has approved a provision to accelerate 37.5% of your new grant
(150,000 options) on December 31, 2000, if you achieve the following goals as
of December 31, 2000:
           .  Achievement of staffing goals
           .  Achievement of new Board approved P&L Plan
           .  Achievement of 3.5 Million subscribers

To assist you in exercising your current options, the Board has approved a
$500,000 loan. This loan will be granted at the lowest prevailing rate provide
by IRS at the time of the loan and will be collateralized with exercised
options. You must provide at least 30 days notice to the Excite@Home Human
Resources if you wish to exercise this loan. This loan shall be repayable in
cash on each 12-month anniversary of the loan. On each 12-month anniversary,
one fourth of the original principal and annual interest will be repaid except
to the extent that any stock options have been exercised and sold, in which
case all post-tax proceeds from any such sale will be immediately applied to
the outstanding principal amount and interest until the principal amount and
interest are paid in full. If you voluntarily resign, you will need to
immediately repay the unpaid balance of the principal and all interest due.
However, if your termination from Excite@Home is involuntary, you will have 90-
days to repay the unpaid and all interest due.

Sincerely,

/s/ Will Hearst
________________
Will Hearst
Board of Directors, Compensation Committee
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. SS.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Advanced Optics  Electronics,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form  10-QSB for the three  months  ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, John Cousins,  Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  ss.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.

                                             /S/ John Cousins
                                             --------------------------
                                             Chief Financial Officer
                                             May 17, 2004

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, an other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section  906,  has been  provided to Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### § 521.42 Judicial review.

Section 3805 of title 31, United States Code, authorizes judicial review by an appropriate United States District Court of a final decision of the Director imposing penalties or assessments under this part and specifies the procedures for such.
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

HALSEY MINOR, an individual,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CHRISTIE’S INC., a New York

corporation, and DOES 1 through 20,

inclusive,

Defendants. /

CHRISTIE’S INC., a New York

corporation,

Counterclaimant,

 v.

HALSEY MINOR, an individual, and

ROES 1 through 20, inclusive,

Counterdefendants. /

No. C 08-05445 WHA (Lead Case)

Consolidated with:

No. C 09-00471 WHA

ORDER DENYING MOTION

FOR LEAVE TO MOVE FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The dispositive motion deadline has long since passed and — as discussed at the final

pretrial conference — factual disputes appear prevalent. For these reasons, Christie’s request for

leave to file a motion for summary judgment is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 26, 2010. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-05445-WHA Document 78 Filed 04/26/10 Page 1 of 1
; 

. . . . “:‘..., 

‘0; . - 

* .:,: 

. . . -: ..:/” 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 


123 
124
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Reginald Overton, Appellant, v Rochambeau School et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

— Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed July 7, 1975. Claimant was a student trainee in the Manpower Development Program of the New York State Department of Labor learning to operate a milling machine under instruction provided by employees of the Rochambeau School. While on school premises in the course of his training, he sustained an injury to his left index finger resulting in its partial amputation. The board has denied claimant benefits holding he was a student and not an employee at the school. Although the record contains proof that claimant received a weekly check in the amount of $71, it is clear that this sum was merely a training allowance paid by the Unemployment Insurance Division of the New York State Department of Labor. There is no evidence that he produced anything for or was employed by the Rochambeau School. Accordingly, since the determination is one of fact which is supported by substantial evidence, the decision of the board must be affirmed *(Matter of Worth v Hubbell Lbr. Corp.,*29 AD2d 1025). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
### §5165c. Public notice, comment, and consultation requirements

#### (a) Public notice and comment concerning new or modified policies

#### (1) In general

The President shall provide for public notice and opportunity for comment before adopting any new or modified policy that—

(A) governs implementation of the public assistance program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency under this chapter; and

(B) could result in a significant reduction of assistance under the program.

#### (2) Application

Any policy adopted under paragraph (1) shall apply only to a major disaster or emergency declared on or after the date on which the policy is adopted.

#### (b) Consultation concerning interim policies

#### (1) In general

Before adopting any interim policy under the public assistance program to address specific conditions that relate to a major disaster or emergency that has been declared under this chapter, the President, to the maximum extent practicable, shall solicit the views and recommendations of grantees and subgrantees with respect to the major disaster or emergency concerning the potential interim policy, if the interim policy is likely—

(A) to result in a significant reduction of assistance to applicants for the assistance with respect to the major disaster or emergency; or

(B) to change the terms of a written agreement to which the Federal Government is a party concerning the declaration of the major disaster or emergency.

#### (2) No legal right of action

Nothing in this subsection confers a legal right of action on any party.

#### (c) Public access

The President shall promote public access to policies governing the implementation of the public assistance program.

(Pub. L. 93–288, title III, §325, as added Pub. L. 106–390, title II, §203, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1560.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1)(A) and (b)(1), was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–288, May 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 143. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5121 of this title and Tables.

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of all functions, personnel, assets, components, authorities, grant programs, and liabilities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including the functions of the Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management relating thereto, to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, see section 315(a)(1) of Title 6, Domestic Security.

For transfer of functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including the functions of the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency relating thereto, to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see former section 313(1) and sections 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
First Department,

April, 1977

(April 5, 1977)

#### Dina M. Viscarde, Petitioner, v State Human Rights Appeal Board et al., Respondents.

Application, pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law, unanimously denied, the cross motion granted and the petition dismissed, without costs and without disbursements. If not dismissed, the determination would be confirmed on the merits. No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Birns, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.