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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1008

To require periodic maintenance dredging for the Greenville Inner Harbor

Channel, Mississippi.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 21, 1995

Mr. THOMPSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To require periodic maintenance dredging for the Greenville

Inner Harbor Channel, Mississippi.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. GREENVILLE INNER HARBOR CHANNEL, MIS4 SISSIPPI.

5 The Greenville Inner Harbor Channel, Mississippi, is

6 deemed to be a portion of the navigable waters of the

7 United States, and shall be included among the navigable

8 waters for which the Secretary of the Army maintains a

9 10-foot navigable channel. The navigable channel for the

10 Greenville Inner Harbor Channel shall be maintained in
2

•HR 1008 IH

1 a manner consistent with the navigable channel of the

2 Greenville Harbor and that portion of the Mississippi

3 River adjacent thereto, as maintained by the Secretary on

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### Rita A. Marrano, Appellant, v Michael Marrano, Respondent.

[804 NYS2d 215]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frank A. Sedita, Jr., J.), entered April 2, 2004. The order, inter alia, confirmed the report of the Referee, which granted the cross motion of defendant to reduce his maintenance obligation.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Pursuant to the parties’ 1994 separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the judgment of divorce, defendant agreed to pay plaintiff $40,000 in maintenance per year. In May 2001, plaintiff sought enforcement of that provision, and defendant cross-moved for a reduction in maintenance. Plaintiff contends that Supreme Court erred in confirming the report of the Referee, which granted the cross motion of defendant by reducing the award of maintenance to plaintiff to $22,000 per year. We reject that contention.

We note at the outset that the Referee erred in finding that, although defendant did not meet his burden of establishing “extreme hardship,” defendant nonetheless was entitled to a reduction in his maintenance obligation based on “a substantial *1105change in his economic circumstance due to factors outside of his control.” It is well settled that in a case such as this, where a party seeks to reduce the amount of maintenance recited in a separation agreement that has been incorporated but not merged into a judgment of divorce, that party must make “a showing of extreme hardship” (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]; *see Mishrick v Mishrick,*251 AD2d 558 [1998]; *Hawley v Hawley,*247 AD2d 806, 807-808 [1998]; *Didley v Didley,*194 AD2d 7, 10 [1993]; *Matter of Cohen v Seletsky,*142 AD2d 111, 117-118 [1988]).

Upon the exercise of our independent power of factual review *(see generally Matter of Baumgartner v Baumgartner*[appeal No. 2], 226 AD2d 1104 [1996]), we nevertheless affirm the order on appeal. Thé record establishes that defendant earned approximately $174,000 from his real estate development business in 1994 but that, by 1999, his earnings were reduced to approximately $18,000. Further, the gross income from his business was approximately $1,810,000 in 1995 but was reduced to $295,000 in 1999. Indeed, plaintiff did not controvert the evidence presented by defendant that his company, valued at $150,000, would produce a yearly income for defendant of $56,557 over the next three years, and that his approximate yearly personal expenses would be $50,400. His only other assets at the time of the hearing were $300 in a bank account and $15,000 in equity in his home. We therefore conclude that defendant met his burden of establishing that his continued payment of $40,000 per year to plaintiff would result in the requisite extreme hardship to warrant reduction of his maintenance obligation *(see Matter of Talandis v Talandis,*233 AD2d 689, 690 [1996]; *see also Hawley,*247 AD2d at 807-808; *cf. Malaga v Malaga,*17 AD3d 642, 643 [2005]; *Barden v Barden,*245 AD2d 695, 696 [1997]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J, Green, Hurlbutt, Gorski and Smith, JJ.
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T MAY 25, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

No. 1 1- 14 83 5 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

D. C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 0- cv -0 03 07 -WS-B CHRIS BAKER, RICHAR D BATTO, CHRIS MCM EEKIN, Pl ai nt iff s- App el la nt s,

ve rs us RBS WORLDPAY, INC., ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND, PLC., CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., Defen da nt s- App el le es .

App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e So ut he rn Dis tri ctof Al ab am a

(Ma y 25 , 20 12 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, HULL andMARTIN, Ci rcu it Ju dg es . PER CURI AM:Thi s i s an ap pe al fro m th e d is tri ctco ur t’s o rd er g ran ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t in fav orof d efen da nt -ap pe ll ees RBS Worl dP ay , Inc ., Royal Ban k o f Sco tl an d, PLC, an d C it iz en s Fi na nc ia l Gro up , Inc . and ag ai ns t p la in ti ff-app el la nt s C hr is Bak er, Ri ch ardBat to , and Ch ris McM eek in . App el la nt s ar gu e th atth e d is tri ct

co ur t erredwhen itgra nt edsu m m ary jud gm en t ag ai ns t t he ir c la im s fo r br each of

co nt ract , con ve rs io n, an d u nju st en ric hm en t. Thi s co ur t re vi ews a gr an t o f su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo . Levi ns on v. Reli an ce Sta nd

ar d L if e In s. Co

. , 24 5 F .3d13 21 , 13 25 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ). Afte r rev ie win g t he reco rdan d re ad in g t he pa rti es ’ br ie fs , we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s o rd er g ran ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of App el le es ba se d o n th e d is tri ctco ur t’s wel l-r eas on edord er fi le d o n Oct ob er 4 , 20 11

. AFFIRMED.

2
§ 28.215 Membership practices of certain organizations. ( a ) *Social fraternities and sororities.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of social fraternities and sororities that are exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at institutions of higher education.
( b ) *YMCA, YWCA, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA), the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts, and Camp Fire Girls.
( c ) *Voluntary youth service organizations.* These Title IX regulations do not apply to the membership practices of a voluntary youth service organization that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. 501(a), and the membership of which has been traditionally limited to members of one sex and principally to persons of less than nineteen years of age.
Unassociated Document


Exhibit 10.11


 



AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO


PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment (this “Amendment”) made and entered into as of July 12, 2012 (“Amendment Date”), by and between PositiveID Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Company”), and Ironridge Global III, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Purchaser”).


 


Recitals


 


A.           A Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”), was made and entered into between the parties as of July 27, 2011.


 


B.           The parties desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment.


 


Agreement


 


In consideration of the foregoing, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Company and Purchaser agree as follows:


 


1.           Announcement Date.  The “Announcement Date” with respect to a share of Series F Preferred Stock shall mean the Trading Day immediately following that Trading Day, during the 20 Trading Day period immediately following the date of receipt of a Conversion Notice with respect to such share of Series F Preferred Stock, on which the Closing Price of a share of Common Stock is closest to, without going over, the arithmetic average of the individual daily volume weighted average prices for the lowest three Trading Days during such 20 Trading Day period.


 


2.           Entire Agreement.  The Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, contains the entire agreement and understanding of the parties, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, term sheets, letters, discussions, communications and understandings, both oral and written.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly executed by their respective authorized signatories as of the Amendment Date.


 




	Company:	 	Purchaser:	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	POSITIVEID CORPORATION	 	IRONRIDGE GLOBAL III, LLC	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:	
/s/William J. Caragol

	 	By:	
/s/John C. Kirkland

	 
	Name:	
William J. Caragol

	 	Name:	
John C. Kirkland

	 
	Title:	
Chief Executive Officer

	 	Title:	
Managing Director
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Re:          Annual Statement of Compliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2016-NXS6

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of October 1, 2016 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### § 23.15 Burden of proof.

The burden of proving that an age distinction or other action falls within the exceptions outlined in §§ 23.13 and 23.14 is on the recipient of Federal financial assistance.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Craftmade International, Inc. (the
"COMPANY") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), I,
Kathleen B. Oher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Kathleen B. Oher
-----------------------------
Kathleen B. Oher
Chief Financial Officer

Dated: February 13, 2003
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________ 

Case No. 5D23-1114 

LT Case No. 1989-CF-6494

_____________________________ 

BOBBY LEE JOHNSON, 

Appellant,

v. 

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee.

_____________________________ 

3.850 appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. 

Lindsay Tygart, Judge. 

Bobby Lee Johnson, Monticello, pro se. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Daren Shippy, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. 

September 26, 2023

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. 

EDWARDS, C.J., LAMBERT, and HARRIS, JJ., concur. 
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
Exhibit 35.12



LOGO

2017 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)

Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the Pooling and Servicing Agreement) dated as of July 1, 2016 by and among SG Commercial
Mortgage Securities, LLC as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC as Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer, Wells Fargo
Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator, and Wilmington Trust, National Association as Trustee relating to the SG Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2016-C5, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2016-C5

(SGCMS 2016-C5)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the Special Servicer) herein
certifies to the following:



| | 1. | All servicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | A review of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period of January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 (the Reporting Period) in accordance with the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects for the Reporting Period and
if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|              |  |                                |  |  |  |                    
|------------- |  | ------------------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------
|Certified by: |  | /s/ Adam
Singer                |  |  |  | Date: March 1, 2018
|              |  | Adam Singer, Managing Director |  |  |  |
Exhibit 10.2

 



 

August 16, 2012

 

Philip Weisberg

FX Alliance Inc.

909 Third Avenue

10th Floor

New York, New York 10022

 

Dear Phil:

 

FXall has made some commitments to you about bonuses, and we want to put them in writing.  In recognition of your achievements in the first half of 2012 and continued commitment towards helping FXall reach its objectives, I am very pleased to advise you of the following:

 

·                  You will be entitled to receive a discretionary bonus for the calendar year 2012 of $1,800,000 (USD) (the “Discretionary Target Bonus”), as more fully described in the bullets below.

 

·                  The bonus described in this letter will be paid to you on or before the 50th day following the Closing Date (as defined in the Agreement and Plan of Merger with Thomson Reuters Corporation and certain of its subsidiaries) (the “Payment Date”).

 

·                  To be eligible to receive the bonus described in this letter, you must remain an employee in good standing and have not tendered your resignation on or prior to the Payment Date.  However, if you are terminated as a direct consequence of the merger agreement between FXall and Thomson Reuters (i.e., not because of performance or for cause) prior to the Payment Date, you will receive $1,800,000 (USD) in the first practical payroll after your last date of employment.

 

·                  In the event of your termination in circumstances which would give rise to severance benefits under your Employment Agreement, as amended (your “Employment Agreement”), that, in part, contemplate payment of a pro-rata portion of your 2012 bonus, then payment of the full Discretionary Target Bonus as contemplated above shall be deemed to have satisfied the payment of such pro-rata portion of your 2012

 











 

bonus. For the avoidance of doubt, benefits that contemplate payment of a pro-rata portion of your 2012 bonus include the payments contemplated in Section 6.f.(ii)(B) and in Section 6.f.(iv)(E) of your Employment Agreement.

 

Once again, thank you for all your accomplishments and your contribution in building FXall to the company it is today.

 

Regards,

 

 

	
/s/ Robert Trudeau
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Robert   Trudeau
    	
 
    
	
Director
    	
 
    
	
Chairman   of the Compensation Committee
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
AGREED   TO AND ACKNOWLEDGED:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   Philip Z. Weisberg
    	
 
    
	
Philip   Z. Weisberg
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 160 (Thursday, August 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42138-42139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19999]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

National Small Business Development Center Advisory Board

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)

ACTION: Notice of open Federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The SBA is issuing this notice to announce the location, date, 
time and agenda for the next meeting of the National Small Business 
Development Center (SBDC) Advisory Board.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 at 2 
p.m. EST.

ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held at the Rosen Shingle Creek Hotel, 
9939 Universal Blvd., Orlando, FL 32819.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), SBA announces the meeting 
of the National SBDC Advisory Board. This Board provides advice and 
counsel to the SBA Administrator and Associate Administrator for Small 
Business Development Centers.
    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the following issues 
pertaining to the SBDC Advisory Board:

--SBA Update from AA/OSBDC;
--White Paper Issues;

[[Page 42139]]

--Member Roundtable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The meeting is open to the public 
however advance notice of attendance is requested. Anyone wishing to be 
a listening participant must contact Alanna Falcone by Friday, 
September 11, 2009, by fax or e-mail in order to be placed on the 
agenda. Alanna Falcone, Program Analyst, 409 Third Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20416, Phone 202-619-1612, Fax 202-481-0134, e-mail, 
[email protected].
    Additionally, if you need accommodations because of a disability or 
require additional information, please contact Alanna Falcone at the 
information above.

Meaghan Burdick,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-19999 Filed 8-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1372 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1372

  To authorize appropriations for the Federal Election Commission for 
                           fiscal year 1996.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 30, 1995

   Mr. Thomas of California introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize appropriations for the Federal Election Commission for 
                           fiscal year 1996.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the second 
sentence of section 314 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
U.S.C. 439c) is amended by striking out ``and'' after ``1978,'' and by 
inserting after ``1981'' the following: ``, and $27,634,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1996''.
                                 <all>
```
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 131

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the child care

credit for lower-income working parents, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase

the child care credit for lower-income working parents,

and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Child Care Tax Credit

5 Reform Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. CHILD CARE CREDIT AMENDMENTS.

7 (a) INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF EMPLOYMENT-RELAT8 ED EXPENSES TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.—

9 (1) 1 QUALIFYING INDIVIDUAL.—Paragraph (1)

10 of section 21(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
2

•HR 131 IH

1 1986 (relating to dollar limit on amount creditable)

2 is amended by striking ‘‘$2,400’’ and inserting

3 ‘‘$3,600’’.

4 (2) 2 OR MORE QUALIFYING INDIVIDUALS.—

5 Paragraph (2) of section 21(c) of such Code (relat6 ing to dollar limit on amount creditable) is amended

7 by striking ‘‘$4,800’’ and inserting ‘‘$5,400’’.

8 (b) DENIAL OF CREDIT TO TAXPAYERS WHOSE AD9 JUSTED GROSS INCOME IS $50,000 OR MORE.—Para10 graph (2) of section 21(a) of the Internal Revenue Code

11 of 1986 (defining applicable percentage) is amended—

12 (1) by striking ‘‘(but not below 20 percent)’’

13 and inserting ‘‘(but not below zero)’’, and

14 (2) by striking ‘‘1 percentage point for each

$2,000 (or fraction thereof)’’ and inserting ‘‘11 15 ⁄2

16 percentage points for each full $2,000’’.

17 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

18 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

19 December 31, 1995.

Æ