alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.5

                                  AMENDMENT

                AMENDMENT (the "Amendment"), dated August 7, 2003, to the
Employment Agreement (the "Agreement"), made May 30, 2003, by and between
Seminis Merger Corp., a Delaware corporation ("Seminis Merger Corp.") and Bruno
Ferrari Garcia de Alba (the "Executive").

                WHEREAS, the parties hereto have entered into the Agreement,
pursuant to which Executive will serve as the Executive Senior Vice President -
World Wide Commercial of Seminis, Inc. on the terms set forth in the Agreement;

                WHEREAS, the parties hereto have mutually agreed to amend the
Agreement as set forth below;

                NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the
premises, representations, warranties and agreements contained in the
Agreement, the parties hereto agree as follows:

                FIRST:  The introductory clause to Section 6.1(a) of the
Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:

                "If, prior to the Termination Date, during the Term,
                Executive's employment is terminated (A) by the Company other
                than for Cause (as defined in Section 6.2(b) hereof), (B) as
                a result of Executive's death or as a result of Executive's
                Permanent Disability (as defined in Section 6.1(d) hereof), or
                (C) by Executive for Good Reason (as defined in Section 6.1(c)
                hereof), Executive shall receive:"

                SECOND: This Amendment shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the state of California without regard to its laws
or regulations relating to choice of law.

                THIRD:  This Agreement may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be considered an original, but all of which
together shall constitute the same instrument.



<PAGE>


                IN WITNESS WHEREOF, as of the date first above written, Seminis
Merger Corp. has caused this Amendment to be executed on its behalf by a duly
authorized officer and Executive has hereunto set Executive's hand.


                                SEMINIS MERGER CORP.


                                By:     /s/   Bernardo Jimenez
                                ----------------------------------
                                Name:         Bernardo Jimenez
                                Title:        President

                                BRUNO FERRARI GARCIA DE ALBA




                                /s/   Bruno Ferrari Garcia de Alba
                                -----------------------------------
[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:****Technology, services, &innovation annual performance report.**
 
SuDoc Number:B 1.1/5:

Item Number:1100-B-07 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000873582
 
2011 | 2012 | 2013
 
March 5, 2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          74,510
<SECURITIES>                                 1,058,125
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,595
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               113,373
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,592,851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,958
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,088,360
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,592,851
<SALES>                                         94,318
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               107,514
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               116,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,323)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,323)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.00)
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### General Services Administration

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - 48 CFR Part 52

### CFR Correction

In Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1 (Parts 52 to 99), revised as of October 1, 2008, on pages 79 and 80, remove and reserve sections 52.214-32 and 52.214-33.

[FR Doc. E9-23475 Filed 9-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

RE: ESTATE OF IRENE OLICK

BUNGARDY, DECEASED

PETITION OF: THOMAS W. OLICK :

:

:

:

: No. 10 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 21st day of March , 2019, the “Motion to Reinstate Case,” treated

as a Petition for Leave to File Petition for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc , is DENIED.
#### Virgil WILLIAMS *v.*STATE of Arkansas

75-208

January 26, 1976

PER CURIAM

Appellant asks this Court to waive the page limitation on printing requirements as set forth in our Supreme Court Rule No. 11(f), and also that, pursuant to 11(g), the Attorney General be required to print the briefs since appellant is an indigent represented by the public defender. The motion states that in the present case the abstract and brief together exceed the 40 page limitation for printing as set out in the Supreme Court Rule No. 11 (F).

Appellant misinterprets the rule with respect to page limitation. The 40 page restriction applies to the *brief only*and not to the abstract *and*brief. The pertinent portion of the rule reads as follows:

> The appellant’s *brief*in chief, before its printing, shall not exceed 40 doublespaced typewritten pages, with a similar 10-page limit upon the reply brief, except that if either limitation is shown to be too stringent in a particular case it may be waived by the Court on motion. (Emphasis added)

Accordingly, appellant’s motion with respect to the brief limitation is denied without prejudice to his right to renew the motion if deemed necessary.

Motion granted as to Rule No. 11(g).
§ 78.125 Program or budget changes and corrective action plans. ( a ) A grantee must submit to VA a written request to modify a suicide prevention services grant for any proposed significant change that will alter the suicide prevention services grant program. If VA approves such change, VA will issue a written amendment to the suicide prevention services grant agreement. A grantee must receive VA's approval prior to implementing a significant change. Significant changes include, but are not limited to, a change in the grantee or any community partners identified in the suicide prevention services grant agreement; a change in the area served by the grantee; additions or deletions of suicide prevention services provided by the grantee; a change in category of participants to be served; and a change in budget line items that are more than 10 percent of the total suicide prevention services grant award. ( 1 ) VA's approval of changes is contingent upon the grantee's amended application retaining a sufficient rank to have been competitively selected for funding in the year that the application was granted.
( 2 ) Each suicide prevention services grant modification request must contain a description of, and justification for, the revised proposed use of suicide prevention services grant funds.
( b ) VA may require that the grantee initiate, develop, and submit to VA for approval a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) if, on a quarterly basis, actual suicide prevention services grant expenditures vary from the amount disbursed to a grantee for that same quarter or actual suicide prevention services grant activities vary from the grantee's program description provided in the suicide prevention services grant agreement. ( 1 ) The CAP must identify the expenditure or activity source that has caused the deviation, describe the reason(s) for the variance, provide specific proposed corrective action(s), and provide a timetable for accomplishment of the corrective action.
( 2 ) After receipt of the CAP, VA will send a letter to the grantee indicating that the CAP is approved or disapproved. If disapproved, VA will make beneficial suggestions to improve the proposed CAP and request resubmission or take other actions in accordance with this part.
( c ) Grantees must inform VA in writing of any key personnel changes (e.g., new executive director, the suicide prevention services grant program director, or chief financial officer) and grantee address changes within 30 days of the change.
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection provisions in this section under control number 2900-0904) [87 FR 13835, Mar. 10, 2022, as amended at 89 FR 62663, Aug. 1, 2024]
Exhibit 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER, SECTION 906


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Thomas M. Hennigan, the Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of Carlyle Secured Lending III (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





• the Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Form 10-K”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and


• the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: March 3, 2022/s/ Thomas M. HenniganThomas M. HenniganChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)





*The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### § 1.658 Right of appeal.

In accordance with 37 CFR 501.8, the employee has a right of appeal to the Secretary of Commerce within 30 days of receipt of the Department's determination of ownership rights. The decision reached by the Secretary of Commerce will be communicated to the employee.

[61 FR 29658, June 12, 1996]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SENTEX SENSING TECHNOLOGY, INC. AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT, FILED ON FORM
10-QSB, FOR THE PERIOD ENDING MAY 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,240,035
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,111,346
<ALLOWANCES>                                    34,792
<INVENTORY>                                  1,360,406
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,899,072
<PP&E>                                         478,134
<DEPRECIATION>                                 252,434
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,384,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,262,634
<BONDS>                                         10,810
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,153,489
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,042,911)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,384,022
<SALES>                                      1,624,552
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,650,999
<CGS>                                          812,118
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  812,118
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,198,391
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,690
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (428,200)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (428,200)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (428,200)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### HUNT OIL COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 20526.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

May 21, 1963.

Thomas G. Crouch, Robert W. Henderson, Dallas, Tex., for petitioners.

Howard E. Wahrenbrock, Solicitor, F.P.C., Richard A. Solomon, Gen. Counsel, F.P.C., Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and RIVES and MOORE,* Circuit Judges.

*

**Of the Second Circuit, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

This is a motion by Petitioners for a stay of an order denying their application for rehearing of the Federal Power Commission’s opinions 382 and 382A, issued March 15, 1963 and April 26, 1963, ordering a certain refund to El Paso Natural Gas Company.

It appearing that an earlier petition to review these orders has been filed by other parties in the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and that the within petition to review will be consolidated with that pending in the Third Circuit, and it appearing that the Court there has heretofore denied a motion to stay upon a ground or grounds which would apply to a part of the sums ordered to be refunded, and movant having failed, as to all amounts ordered refunded, to satisfy the requirement that in such a case it must be shown that a denial of the stay would cause irreparable injury to movant, the said motion to stay is hereby

Denied.
GRADE OF STREET.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

November Term, 1888.]

Smith, Swing and Cox, JJ.

#### CHARLES PITTON ET AL. v. CITY OF CINCINNATI.

Reasonableness of Grade a Jury Question.

What is a reasonable grade established by a city for a street is a question for the jury to determine from all the evidence in the case; and while the fact that it was established by proper authority and competent officers is to be considered, yet it is not conclusive as to the character of the grade.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county.

Cox, J

The plaintiffs in error owned property on the north side of McMillan street, upon which they erected buildings previous to the establishment of any grade for the street. In December, 1886, the city passed an ordinance establishing a grade for that street. Plaintiffs in error filed claims for damages to their improvements by reason of the change of grade, and thereafter the city brought this suit to have an inquiry as to damages. The main inquiry in the case was to ascertain whether the- Pittons had erected their buildings with reference to such reasonable grade of the street as might thereafter be made. As to what was such reasonable grade the court charged the jury as follows;

“The expression ‘a reasonable grade’ has no fixed, definite meaning. It is a relative expression, and it means just this: That the public agent or agents have the authority to establish the grade; if they exercise such care and foresight as persons of ordinary prudence and skill in respect to that question are accustomed to exercise in such cases,, then it is a reasonable grade. That is a question you have to inquire of yourselves: What such a reasonable person, having the authority to establish this grade — what would such a person have established? If such a person would not have established this grade, but some other grade, under all the circumstances and facts surrounding at the time, it is an. unreasonable grade.” ’

Held: We think this charge was not only erroneous, but calculated to mislead the jury. What was a reasonable grade was a question to be decided by the jury under all the circumstances; and-while'the grade established by the city authorities was established by proper and competent authority, and was proper *344to be considered by the jury, they were not to take it for granted that it was a reasonable grade because these officers established it; and yet this would seem to be the meaning to be attached to the charge of the court.

Cowan & Ferris and John S. Conner, for plaintiffs in error.

Theo. Horstman, City Solicitor, *contra.*

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CML GROUP, INC. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
JANUARY 27, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      17,375,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               34,255,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 4,086,000
<INVENTORY>                                 59,472,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           175,811,000
<PP&E>                                     187,488,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              74,176,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             315,527,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      116,459,000
<BONDS>                                     41,593,000
<COMMON>                                     5,217,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 134,602,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               315,527,000
<SALES>                                    331,412,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           331,412,000
<CGS>                                      156,087,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              156,087,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             3,957,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,573,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (46,025,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                              (16,569,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (29,456,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                            (15,615,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (47,071,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.91)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.91)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 35.1**

**Servicer Compliance Statement of John Deere Capital Corporation**

​

I, Katrin Watkins, Assistant Secretary of John Deere Capital Corporation, state:

​

A review of John Deere Capital Corporation’s activities for the period from November 1, 2021 through October 30, 2022 (the “Reporting Period”) and of John Deere Capital Corporation’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 10, 2021 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables LLC and John Deere Owner Trust 2021 has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, John Deere Capital Corporation has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

​

​

| ​               | ​                        | ​              |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------|----------------------|
| Date: January 9, 2023 | John Deere Capital Corporation |
| ​               | ​                        | ​              |
| ​               | By:                            | */s/ Katrin Watkins* |
| ​               | ​                        | Katrin Watkins       |
| ​               | ​                        | Assistant Secretary  |
| ​               | ​                        | ​              |
| ​               | ​                        | ​              |
|                       | ​                        | ​              |

​

​

----