alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Unassociated Document


    Service
Supplemental Agreement

    


    
      	
              Party
      A:

            	
              Yangguang
      Tianhe (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd.

              Sunity
      Online Entertainment Limited (“Party A”)

            
	
              Legal
      Representative:

            	
              Fan
      Zhang

            
	 
      	 
      
	
              Party
      B:

            	
              Simon
      Hong He (“Party B”)

            
	
              ID
      Card No.:

            	
              1101020196901251132

            


    

    


    Whereas Party A and Party B executed an
agreement in March 2010, pursuant to which Party B was engaged to be Party A’s
Chief Financial Officer.

    


    In September 2010, pursuant to an
agreement between Party A and Party A’s underwriter, Rodman & Renshaw, Party
A had its current stock totaling 11,020,000 shares reverse split at the ratio of
2.49:1, upon the completion of which Party A now has a total of 4,425,704 shares
of capital stock.

    


    Due to the resulting change in the
structure of the Company’s capital stock, Party A and Party B, through
consultation, agree to make the following corresponding adjustments to Party B’s
options award plan:

    


    During
the term of the agreement, Party A shall make four issuances to Party B of Party
A’s stock options for a total of 40,160 shares: (1) the first is on the date of
the listing, on which date Party A shall issue to Party B stock options for
10,040 shares; (2) the second is on the first anniversary date of the listing,
on which date Party A shall issue to Party B stock options for 10,040 shares;
(3) the third is on the second anniversary date of the listing, on which date
Party A shall issue to Party B stock options for 10,040 shares; and (4) the
fourth is on the third anniversary date of the listing, on which date Party A
shall issue to Party B stock options for 10,040 shares.

    


    Party B
shall have the right to exercise such options on the day of receiving them at
the exercise price equal to the public offering price and Party A shall pay on
Party B’s behalf any consideration required of such exercise.

    


    This
supplemental agreement shall prevail in the event of any inconsistency between
the content herein and that in the original agreement.

    


    This
supplemental agreement is in duplicates, with one to Party A and Party B each
and both having the same legal effect, and it shall become effective once it is
signed by both parties.

    


    
      	
              Party
      A:

            	
              Yangguang
      Tianhe (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd.

              Sunity
      Online Entertainment Limited (“Party A”)

            
	
              (Signature):

            	
              /s/
      Fan Zhang

            
	
              October
      1, 2010

            	 
      
	 	 
	
              Party
      B:

            	
              Simon
      Hong He (“Party B”)

            
	
              (Signature):

            	
              /s/
      Simon Hong He

            
	
              October
      1, 2010
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

Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE CITIBANK HELOC REDUCTIONLITIGATION

                                                                      /

No. C-09-0350 MMC

ORDER VACATING HEARING ONDEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISSSECOND AMENDED/CONSOLIDATEDCLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Before the Court is defendant Citibank, N.A.’s “Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second

Amended/Consolidated Class Action Complaint,” filed June 23, 2010, as amended June

24, 2010.  Plaintiffs David Levin, Gary Cohen, Marie Cohen, and Mark Winkler have filed

opposition, to which defendant has replied.  Having read and considered the papers filed in

support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court deems the matter suitable for decision

on the parties’ respective written submissions and VACATES the hearing scheduled for

August 6, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  August 3, 2010                                                   MAXINE M. CHESNEYUnited States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-00350-MMC   Document 108   Filed 08/03/10   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2018-03-11T19:45:20-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARSHALL NAIFY REVOCABLE

TRUST et al.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. /

No. C 09-1604 CRB

ORDER TO PROVIDE

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING

The Court orders that the parties submit further briefing on the following question:

Assuming the Court agrees with the Government that post-death events are relevant to the

tax determination at issue in this case, but disagrees that judicial estoppel applies, is this case

subject to resolution on a motion for judgment on the pleadings? Or must the case go

forward toward a fact determination as to the value of the claim on the date of death?

The Government shall submit a brief no later than February 19, 2010. Plaintiff shall

respond no later than February 26. A reply, if the Government wishes to file one, shall be

filed by March 5. Opening briefs should be no more than 10 pages, and the reply no more 

///

///

///

Case 3:09-cv-01604-CRB Document 20 Filed 02/04/10 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

G:\CRBALL\2009\1604\Supplemental Briefing Order.wpd 2

than 5 pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 4, 2010 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-01604-CRB Document 20 Filed 02/04/10 Page 2 of 2
#### § 220.814 Election of action.

Where a real estate mortgage, deed of trust, conditional sales contract, chattel mortgage, lien, judgment, or any other security device has been used to secure the payment of a loan made under the provisions of this section, the lender may not, except with the approval of the Commissioner, both proceed against such security and also make claim under its contract of insurance, but shall elect which method it desires to pursue.
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 

RUDY EXELROD ZIEFF & LOWE LLP

351 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 700 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 

PH (415) 434-9800 | FX (415) 434-0513 | www.rezlaw.com

1 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL 

CASE NO. CV-09-0622 EMC 

David A. Lowe (SBN: 178811) 

Kenneth J. Sugarman (SBN: 195059) 

RUDY, EXELROD, ZIEFF & LOWE, L.L.P. 

351 California Street, Suite 700 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 434-9800 

Facsimile: (415) 434-0513 

Email: dal@rezlaw.com 

Email: kjs@rezlaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Jason Stevens 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

JASON STEVENS, Case No. CV-09-0622 EMC 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

SHAMUS & PEABODY, LLC, a California 

limited liability corporation, d/b/a Thomas 

Keller Restaurant Group, and YOUNTVILLE 

FOOD EMPORIUM, LLC, a California 

limited liability corporation, d/b/a Bouchon. 

 Defendants. / 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL 

Complaint Filed: January 10, 2008 

Trial Date: May 17, 2010 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action through their 

designated counsel that the above-captioned action be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice 

pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1) and that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the 

parties’ Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims. 

DATED: February 22, 2010 RUDY, EXELROD, ZIEFF & LOWE, LLP 

By: /s/ David A. Lowe 

DAVID A. LOWE 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 3:09-cv-00622-EMC Document 61 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 3
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 

RUDY EXELROD ZIEFF & LOWE LLP

351 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 700 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 

PH (415) 434-9800 | FX (415) 434-0513 | www.rezlaw.com

2 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL 

CASE NO. CV-09-0622 EMC 

DATED: February 22, 2010 DICKENSON, PEATMAN & FOGARTY, PC 

By: /s/ Brandon R. Blevans 

BRANDON R. BLEVANS 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

Case 3:09-cv-00622-EMC Document 61 Filed 02/23/10 Page 2 of 3
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 

RUDY EXELROD ZIEFF & LOWE LLP

351 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 700 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 

PH (415) 434-9800 | FX (415) 434-0513 | www.rezlaw.com

ECF ATTESTATION 

CASE NO. CV-09-0622 EMC 

ECF ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Local ECF Rules, I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this 

document has been obtained from the non-filing signatories. 

Executed this 22nd day of February, 2010, at San Francisco, California. 

 /s/ David A. Lowe 

 DAVID A. LOWE 

Case 3:09-cv-00622-EMC Document 61 Filed 02/23/10 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE UNIFRAX
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30,
2000, AND THEIR CONDENSED  CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
JUNE 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000


<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                  JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                        0
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 15,349
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  614
<INVENTORY>                                                   9,335
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              27,145
<PP&E>                                                        78,086
<DEPRECIATION>                                                42,830
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                81,920
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         12,538
<BONDS>                                                       99,200
<COMMON>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                                    (33,395)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  81,920
<SALES>                                                       46,776
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              46,776
<CGS>                                                         22,319
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 22,319
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              241
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            5,340
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               6,309
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  2,202
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           4,107
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  4,107
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2907 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2907

 To suspend temporarily the duty on N,N-dimethylpiperidinium chloride.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 15, 2005

Mr. Bishop of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on N,N-dimethylpiperidinium chloride.

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

SECTION 1. N,N-DIMETHYLPIPERIDINIUM CHLORIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.70      N,N-                Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         dimethylpiperidin                                                  31/2008
                         ium chloride (CAS
                         No. 24307-26-
                         4)provided for in
                         subheading
                         2933.39.250).....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1000.312 What is current assisted stock?

Current assisted stock consists of housing units owned or operated pursuant to an ACC. This includes all low rent, Mutual Help, and Turnkey III housing units under management as of September 30, 1997, as indicated in the Formula Response Form.
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

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

U

For the Northern District of California

NITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

CRAIG YATES,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

ICAFE,

Defendant(s).

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-01448 MEJ

SECOND ORDER RE: STATUS

On October 13, 2009, the Plaintiffs in this case filed a Notice of Settlement. (Dkt. #10.) 

Although Plaintiffs stated that dismissal documents would be filed within 90 days, no further filings

have been made. Accordingly, on January 20, 2010, the Court ordered the parties to file a stipulation 

for dismissal or request that the matter be placed back on calendar. The stipulation was to be filed by

February 2, 2010. (Dkt. #11.) As no stipulation has been received, the Court hereby ORDERS the

parties to file their stipulation by February 25, 2010, or the case will be dismissed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 17, 2010 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

Chief United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:09-cv-01448-MEJ Document 12 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 1
### SUBCHAPTER XL—ARBUCKLE PROJECT, OKLAHOMA
#### (A) Lillian Liebowitz, Appellant, v. Murray Levy et al., Respondents. (B) Werner L. Loeb et al., Doing Business as Hudson Valley Legal Supply Company, Respondents, v. Tuttle Law Print, Inc., Appellant. (C) John Lovrich, Respondent, v. Ronald J. Wulf, Appellant. (D) David *489Matus, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Casualty Insurance Company of New York, Appellant. (E) Richard McNeill, Appellant, v. John Hanrahan et al., Respondents. (F) Frank Banas, Respondent, v. Ralph Caserta et al., Appellants. (G) Catherine Roberts, Appellant, v. Vernon W. Bauer et al., Doing Business under the Name of Oceanside Taxi Co. et al., Respondents.

[In each action] On the call of the Special Calendar, there being no appearance for appellant, the appeal is dismissed, without costs. Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
----

hi

|   | (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      as of and for the period covered by theReport. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ John C. Roman                                     |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|   | John      C. Roman                                    |
|   | President      and Chief Executive Officer            |
|   |                                                  |
|   |                                                  |
|   | /s/ Lee R. Schlesinger                                |
|   | Lee      R. Schlesinger                               |
|   | Senior      Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer |

----
#### § 203.341 Partial claim.

If the conditions of § 203.371 are met and a partial claim is paid pursuant to that section, the contract of insurance shall continue in force, except as otherwise provided in this subpart.

[62 FR 60129, Nov. 6, 1997]
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-09-00108-CV

CLIFTON JERRY LANDRY,

Appellant

v.

TEXAS DEPT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, ET AL.,

Appellees

From the 12th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 23,002

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Clifton Jerry Landry seeks to appeal from a “COLLECTION (COURT FEE/ETC.) 

ORDER” signed by the trial court on September 23, 2008. Landry filed his notice of 

appeal on April 8, 2009. We will dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The Clerk of this Court notified Landry that the appeal was subject to dismissal

for want of jurisdiction because: (1) the notice of appeal is untimely; see TEX. R. APP. P.

26.1(b), 28.1(b); and (2) there does not appear to be a statute giving this Court 

jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal. See Ogletree v. Matthews, 262 S.W.3d 316, 319 
Landry v. Tex. Dep’t of Criminal Justice Page 2

n.1 (Tex. 2007). Landry was warned that the appeal may be dismissed if he or any party 

did not file a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

42.3(a). The Court has received no response.1 Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

FELIPE REYNA

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed May 20, 2009

[CV06]

 

1 The Court did receive Landry’s docketing statement five days after mailing the notice letter. 

However, it does not appear that Landry filed this document in response to the notice letter.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Robert K. Moskovitz, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 of LeaseEquity Appreciation Fund II, L.P.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)] for theregistrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date:  March 31, 2008 /s/ Robert K. Moskovitz   Name:  Robert K. Moskovitz   Title:  Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner