alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA LETTERHEAD]

                                        Commercial Loan Documentation Department

                                                                December 7, 1999

SVI HOLDINGS, INC.
12707 High Bluff Drive, Suite 335
San Diego, CA  92130

Dear MR. REESE:

This letter is being sent at the request of your Account Manager, LINDA WELKER,
and is to confirm that Union Bank of California, N.A. ("Bank") has agreed to
extend the maturity date of the TERM LOAN A ("Facility") granted to SVI
HOLDINGS, INC. ("Borrower") in the principal amount of FIFTEEN MILLION AND
NO/100 DOLLARS ($15,000,000) originally made under a certain TERM LOAN AGREEMENT
dated JUNE 3, 1999 as amended from time to time, and promissory note date JUNE
3, 1999 as amended from time to time (collectively, the "Agreement"). A copy of
the note is attached.

The maturity date of the Facility is hereby extended to MARCH 3, 2000 ("New
Maturity Date"). The Agreements shall be deemed modified as of the date of this
letter to reflect the New Maturity Date.

All other terms and conditions of the Agreements remain in full force and
effect, without waiver or modification. This extension is further conditioned
upon Borrower's continued payment of (i) interest as provided in the Agreements,
and (ii) any principal installments which Borrower was obligated to make prior
to this extension.

Each advance request, or Borrower's continued payments of principal or interest
on the outstanding balance of any term loan, constitutes Borrower's warranty
that no event of default as defined in the Agreement and no condition, event or
act which with the giving of notice or the passage of time or both, would
constitute such an event of default, shall have occurred and be continuing or
shall exist.

BANK HAS NOT COMMITTED TO MAKE ANY FURTHER EXTENSION OF THE MATURITY DATE, OR TO
RENEW THE FACILITY BEYOND THE NEW MATURITY DATE. ANY FURTHER EXTENSION OR ANY
RENEWAL REMAINS IN THE DISCRETION OF BANK. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE
CONTACT OUR ACCOUNT MANAGER, LINDA WELKER, AT 714-565-5726.

Very truly yours,

UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, N.A.


By: /s/ Trudy Gerber
   -------------------------------
         TRUDY GERBER
         ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Saint Lucia National Day

# 									Saint Lucia National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

February 22, 2023

On behalf of the United States of America, I send best wishes to the people of Saint Lucia as you celebrate the 44th anniversary of your independence.

The United States is committed to its long-standing and enduring partnership with Saint Lucia. We are proud of our work together under the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative to address crime and violence in Saint Lucia and help support a safe, secure, and prosperous Caribbean region. Going forward, we are excited to collaborate on the U.S.-Caribbean Partnership to Address the Climate Crisis 2030 (PACC 2030), which will help Saint Lucia and other countries in the region combat one of the most difficult challenges we are facing today.

On Saint Lucia’s Independence Day, the United States hopes for a happy and prosperous year to come for all Saint Lucians.

Tags

Bureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsOffice of the SpokespersonSaint LuciaThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
#### § 308.535 Post-hearing briefs.

The ALJ may require the parties to file post-hearing briefs. In any event, any party may file a post-hearing brief. The ALJ will fix the time for filing such briefs, not to exceed 60 days from the date the parties receive the transcript of the hearing or, if applicable, the stipulated record. Such briefs may be accompanied by proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The ALJ may permit the parties to file reply briefs.
42366.

#### CRIDER et al. v. STATE OF GEORGIA.

Frankum, Judge.

1. Rule 17 (c) (3) of the rules of this court, as adopted by it on July 21, 1965, and effective on August 1, 1965, provides, with reference to the contents of the brief of the appellant required to be filed in this court, that each enumerated error shall be supported by specific reference to the record or transcript or both, and that any argument or assertion founded on a particular portion of the evidence must be supported by a reference to the page or pages of the transcript where the evidence may be found. These rules, promulgated by the court pursuant to the rule-making authority of this court, are binding on those who practice in this court and must be observed. *Code*§ 24-106; *Chapman v. Gray,*8 Ga. 337, 339 (3). With one exception counsel for the appellants in this case have not furnished this court with any reference, either in their enumeration of errors or in their brief, to the place or places in the record or in the transcript where the portions of the pleadings or *348the evidence necessary to an understanding of the errors assigned may be found by the court to ascertain the merits of the appeal. With the one exception, the enumerations of error, which all require a reference to the record or to the transcript for a decision on their merits, cannot be considered by this court. See *Pinyan v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.,*113 Ga. App. 130 (147 SE2d 452).

*Felton, C. J., and Pannell, J., concur.*

Submitted October 4, 1966

Decided March 3, 1967.

*Johnson & Johnson, William P. Johnson,*for appellants.

*Wright Lip-ford, Solicitor General,*for appellee.

2. On the last page of the appellants’ brief counsel refer to “the court’s charge, on Record 41, as set forth in the Enumeration of Errors.” Upon examination of the record and transcript transmitted to this court, the charge does not appear to be incorporated in the record at all, but *is*set forth in the transcript, and one portion of the charge quoted in one of the enumerations of error appears on page 41 of the transcript. However, the argument contained in the brief with respect to this portion of the charge is no more than a reiteration of the enumeration of error in that regard. Conceding for the purpose of this opinion that the incorrect reference set forth in the brief of the appellants, referring to the record rather than to the transcript which was obviously intended, and conceding that the mere reiteration in the brief of the enumeration of error constituted sufficient argument and was enough to require this court to consider the enumeration of error relating to a portion of the charge, it does not appear that any exception was taken to the charge as required by Sec. 17 (a) of the Appellate Practice Act of 1965, and for this reason this enumeration of error will not be considered. Since there is no enumeration of error that the evidence did not support the verdict, the judgment must be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2659

To require advance notification of Congress regarding any action proposed 

to be taken by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs in the implementation 

of the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services initiative of 

the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 7, 2003

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

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL

To require advance notification of Congress regarding any 

action proposed to be taken by the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs in the implementation of the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services initiative of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 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. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION OF A DEPARTMENT 

4 OF VETERANS AFFAIRS CAPITAL ASSET RE5 ALIGNMENT INITIATIVE. 

6 (a) REQUIREMENT FOR ADVANCE NOTIFICATION.—

7 Before taking any action proposed under the Capital Asset 
2

•HR 2659 IH 

1 Realignment for Enhanced Services initiative of the De2 partment of Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Veterans 

3 Affairs shall submit to Congress a written notification of 

4 the intent to take such action. 

5 (b) LIMITATION.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

6 may not take any proposed action described in subsection 

7 (a) until the later of—

8 (1) the expiration of the 60-day period begin9 ning on the date on which the Secretary submits to 

10 Congress the notification of the proposed action re11 quired under subsection (a); or 

12 (2) the expiration of a period of 30 days of con13 tinuous session of Congress beginning on such date 

14 of notification or, if either House of Congress is not 

15 in session on such date, the first day after such date 

16 that both Houses of Congress are in session. 

17 (c) CONTINUOUS SESSION OF CONGRESS.—For the 

18 purposes of subsection (b)—

19 (1) the continuity of session of Congress is bro20 ken only by an adjournment of Congress sine die; 

21 and 

22 (2) the days on which either House is not in 

23 session because of an adjournment of more than 

24 three days to a day certain are excluded in the com-
3

•HR 2659 IH 

1 putation of any period of time in which Congress is 

2 in continuous session.

Æ
§ 303.223 What constitutes a conviction under section 19? ( a ) *Convictions requiring an application.* There must be a conviction of record. Section 19 does not cover arrests or pending cases not brought to trial, unless the person has a program entry as set out in § 303.224. Section 19 does not cover acquittals or any conviction that has been reversed on appeal, unless the reversal was for the purpose of re-sentencing. A conviction with regard to which an appeal is pending requires an application. A conviction for which a pardon has been granted will require an application.
( b ) *Convictions not requiring an application.* When an individual is charged with a covered offense and, in the absence of a program entry as set out in § 303.224, is subsequently convicted of an offense that is not a covered offense, the conviction is not subject to section 19.
( c ) *Expungements.* If an order of expungement or an order to seal has been issued in regard to a conviction, or if a record has been otherwise expunged by operation of law, then the conviction shall not be considered a conviction of record and shall not require an application.
( d ) *Youthful offenders.* An adjudication by a court against a person as a “youthful offender” under any youth-offender law applicable to minors as defined by state law, or any judgment as a “juvenile delinquent” by any court having jurisdiction over minors as defined by state law, does not require an application. Such an adjudication does not constitute a matter covered under section 19 and is not a conviction or program entry for determining the applicability of § 303.227.
# MD5 checksums generated by MD5summer (http://www.md5summer.org)
# Generated 3/20/2009 3:22:25 PM

e193d4de47382750363bb2f4d4ac3434 *june2004.txt
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Prak Sokhonn

# 									Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Prak Sokhonn							

Remarks

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

Prak Sokhonn, Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister

Treaty Room

Washington, D.C.

May 13, 2022

**SECRETARY BLINKEN:**  Well, good afternoon, everyone.  It’s a pleasure to be here with the deputy prime minister of Cambodia.  I really want to thank you, Deputy Prime Minister, and Cambodia for your leadership of ASEAN and for everything you’ve done to make this such a successful special summit between the United States and ASEAN.

We’ve had an opportunity to deepen the work that we’re doing together, and to put out – I think, a very important vision statement for the future, and Cambodia’s work to bring us to this point is greatly appreciated.  We’re working very closely together as partners to try to advance a shared vision for the region, including regional security.  And of course, we welcome the leadership role that you’re playing in ASEAN on a number of issues, including hopefully working to restore the democratic path in Myanmar.

So, it’s very good to have you here.  Welcome again to the State Department.

**DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER PRAK SOKHONN:**  Thank you very much, Secretary Blinken.  It’s a real honor, pleasure to be here to have this meeting with you.  It’s an opportunity for us to exchange views, especially to strengthen our bilateral cooperation.  And it’s a wonderful for Cambodia as a chair to have been able to organize – co-organize this summit between ASEAN leaders and the U.S.

I am ready to have a good discussion with Secretary Blinken, in order to strengthen our bilateral relationship and to push forward for solution in a number of regional issues.  Thank you.

**SECRETARY BLINKEN:**  Thank you, everyone.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsCambodiaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateU.S.-ASEAN Summit

Back to Top
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00138

- CR

C RYSTAL M ASON

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Ap pe al from 432nd District Court

of Tarrant County ( 1485710D )

March 28, 2024

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(p)

JUDGMENT ON RE MAND

This appeal is on remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals.

This court has again considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was error in the trial court’s judgment. We reverse the trial court’s judgment

and render a judgment of acquittal.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

Justice Wade B irdwell
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 3194

_____________________________
H ARBOR F REIGHT T OOLS , I NC

. and S AFETY N ATIONAL C ASUALTY C ORP ./C ORVEL , Appellant s ,

v.

P ATRICIA W HITEHEAD , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Ralph J. Humphries, Judge.

Date of Accident: May 3, 2015

. May 18, 2018

P ER C URIAM

. A judge of compensation claims awarded workers’ compensation benefits based on the so

- called “120

- day rule
, ” which generally precludes carriers from denying compensability if they begin paying benefits and do not challenge compensability within 120 days. See § 440.20(4) , Fla. Stat. (2015) ; see also Sierra v. Metropolitan Protective Servs., 188 So. 3d 863, 866

- 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). But “[a] claimant’s ‘defense’ of waiver to an [employer’s] ability to deny compensability of an accident or specific injury/c ondition pursuant to the ‘120

- Day Rule’ is an2 affirmative pleading which must be timely raised and specifically plead[ed].” Teco Energy, Inc. v. Williams , 234 So. 3d 816, 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). Here the claimant did not specifically plead application of the 120

- day rule. The judge of compensation claims therefore erred in awarding benefits based on the rule.

R EVERSED

.
L EWIS , K ELSEY , and W INSOR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________ Daniel M. Schwarz and Gina M. Jacobs of Cole
, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Plantation, for Appellants.

Daniel J. Glary, Jacksonville, for Appellee.
§ 79.15 Eligible veterans. ( a ) To be eligible for legal services under this part, an individual must be a: ( 1 ) Homeless veteran or
( 2 ) Veteran at risk for homelessness.
( b ) “At risk for homelessness” in this part means an individual who does not have sufficient resources or support networks, *e.g.,* family, friends, faith-based or other social networks, immediately available to prevent them from moving to an emergency shelter or another place described in paragraph (1) of the definition of “homeless” in 24 CFR 576.2 and meets one or more of the following conditions: ( 1 ) Has moved because of economic reasons two or more times during the 60 days immediately preceding the application for assistance;
( 2 ) Is living in the home of another because of economic hardship;
( 3 ) Has been notified in writing that their right to occupy their current housing or living situation will be terminated within 21 days after the date of application for assistance;
( 4 ) Is constructively evicted from their current housing because of untenable conditions created by the landlord such as shutting off electricity and water or discriminatory acts;
( 5 ) Lives in a hotel or motel and the cost of the hotel or motel stay is not paid by charitable organizations or by Federal, State, or local government programs for low-income individuals;
( 6 ) Lives in a single-room occupancy or efficiency apartment unit in which there reside more than two persons or lives in a larger housing unit in which there reside more than 1.5 persons reside per room, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau;
( 7 ) Is exiting a publicly funded institution, or system of care (such as a health-care facility, a mental health facility, foster care or other youth facility, or correction program or institution);
( 8 ) Is fleeing, or is attempting to flee domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or other dangerous or life-threatening conditions that relate to violence against the individual, including a child, that has either taken place within the individual's primary nighttime residence or has made the individual afraid to return to their primary nighttime residence; or
( 9 ) Otherwise lives in housing that has characteristics associated with instability and an increased risk for homelessness.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM HYBRID
NETWORKS, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          26,167
<SECURITIES>                                       981
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,045
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,175
<INVENTORY>                                      3,368
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,748
<PP&E>                                           3,054
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,246
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  43,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,837
<BONDS>                                          6,118
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,154
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    43,119
<SALES>                                         14,270
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,270
<CGS>                                           12,258
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,033
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,175
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 968
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,590)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,590)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.84)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.38


                                  AMENDMENT TWO
                                       TO
                           THE 1997 STOCK OPTION PLAN
                          OF ELCOM INTERNATIONAL, INC.


                  WHEREAS,   subject  to  stockholder  approval,  the  Board  of
Directors of Elcom  International,  Inc. (the "Company")  approved the following
Amendment  Two to The  1997  Stock  Option  Plan of Elcom  International,  Inc.,
effective March 11, 1999; and

                  WHEREAS,  the  undersigned  officer is authorized,  subject to
stockholder  approval, to integrate this amendment into the Company's 1997 Stock
Option  Plan and any officer is  thereafter  entitled to certify the same as the
true and complete copy of the amended Plan;

                  NOW,  THEREFORE,  The 1997 Stock  Option  Plan of Elcom
International, Inc. is hereby amended as follows:

         A. The first  sentence of Section 6,  entitled  "Shares  Subject to the
Plan" is hereby deleted in its entirety, and replaced with the following:

               "6. Shares Subject to the Plan.  Subject to the provisions of the
next succeeding  provisions of this Section 6, the aggregate number of shares of
Common Stock for which  options may be granted under the Plan shall be 3,000,000
shares of Common Stock."

               IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Elcom International, Inc., by the undersigned
officer duly authorized, has executed this document as of the 11th day of March,
1999.
                            THE COMPANY

                            ELCOM INTERNATIONAL, INC.



                            By: /s/ Laurence F. Mulhern
                            Laurence F. Mulhern
                            Its:  Corporate Executive Vice President,
                            Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PATRICK PAGE,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

JOHN MARSHALL,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 08-55266

D.C. No. 2:07-cv-06071-AHM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

A. Howard Matz, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Patrick Page appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We

dismiss.

Page contends that the Board’s 2004 decision to deny him parole was not

FILED

JUN 23 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-55266

supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. After

briefing was completed in this case, this court held that a certificate of

appealability (“COA”) is required to challenge the denial of parole. See Hayward

v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546, 554-55 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc). Now the Supreme

Court has held that the only federal right at issue in the parole context is

procedural, and the only proper inquiry is what process the inmate received, not

whether the state court decided the case correctly. See Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S.

Ct. 859, 863 (2011) (per curiam). Because Page raises no procedural challenges

regarding his parole hearing, a COA cannot issue, and we dismiss the appeal for

lack of jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 

Further, because Page has not has made a substantial showing of the denial

of a constitutional right, we decline to certify his remaining claims. Id.

We deny Page’s “motion to amend petition for writ of habeas corpus,”

received on October 14, 2008.

DISMISSED.