alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex-10.9

 Exhibit 10.9
 

 

 CONSULTING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
 

 This CONSULTING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) is dated as of July 1, 2017 (the “Effective Date”) by and between PwrCor, Inc., formerly named Receivable Acquisition & Management Corporation (and f/k/a Cornerstone Sustainable Energy), a Delaware corporation, (“PwrCor”) and Wallace Baker (the “Consultant”), each a “Party” and collectively, the “Parties” hereto.
 WHEREAS, PwrCor engaged the Consultant and entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of July 1, 2014 embodying the terms of such engagement; and
 WHEREAS, Consultant desires to continue providing services to PwrCor on the terms and conditions set forth therein and as amended herein.
 NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the Parties agree to renew said Agreement, amended as follows:
 A.
 Term.  Paragraphs 1.b. and 7 shall be amended as follows:
 1.b.
 Term of Agreement
 The term of the Agreement shall be renewed for an additional three (3) year period, commencing on the Effective Date, and shall continue until terminated pursuant to Paragraph 7 below (the “Term”). 
 B.
 Compensation.  Paragraph 3 shall be deleted in its entirety and amended to read as follows:
 

 Consultant shall receive no base compensation until, upon the determination of the PwrCor Board of Directors, PwrCor’s funding or revenues are adequate to pay Consultant any compensation.  Upon such determination, the Board of Directors shall determine the level of such compensation, which it may elect to change from time to time, otherwise subject to the terms of Paragraph 3.(a). 
 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
 	 	
	 Consultant: 
	 ___/s/ Wallace R. Baker_____________

	  
	 Wallace R. Baker

	  
	  

	 PwrCor:
	 ___/s/ Thomas Telegades____________

	  
	 Thomas Telegades

	  
	 Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Frederick J. (Rick) Mandelbaum, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this special financial report of Gateway Pacific Bancorp;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.



/s/    Frederick J. (Rick) MandelbaumFrederick J. (Rick) MandelbaumChief Executive Officer


Date: July 7, 2009
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

MINUTE ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

PAUL S. CLOER,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED FOOD & COMMERCIAL

WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION,

et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C05-1526JLR

MINUTE ORDER

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable

James L. Robart:

The court has received a letter from Plaintiff’s counsel regarding his suspension

from the practice of law until January 9, 2006, which the court will make part of the

docket in this action. The letter explains that Plaintiff’s counsel cannot represent his

client during his suspension.

Counsel’s suspension should not impact the progress of this action. The court has

no address for Plaintiff, but directs Plaintiff’s counsel to provide Plaintiff with a copy of

this order. Plaintiff is advised that he must either find another attorney to represent him,

or must pursue this action without an attorney. If he chooses the former route, his new

attorney must enter a notice of appearance promptly. If he chooses the latter route, he

must provide the court with notice of his mailing address. 

Case 2:05-cv-01526-JLR Document 8 Filed 11/28/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MINUTE ORDER - 2

The court has received Defendants’ motion (Dkt. # 4) to consolidate this action

with Case No. 05-1527C, an action in which Plaintiff’s wife makes similar allegations

against the same Defendants. There appears to be good cause to consolidate the actions,

but Plaintiff has had no opportunity to provide input. 

The court therefore orders as follows:

(1) Plaintiff’s counsel shall immediately provide a copy of this order and other

pleadings in this action to Plaintiff.

(2) Plaintiff shall either enter a notice of appearance from a new attorney or

provide this court with his mailing address within 14 days of this order.

(3) If Plaintiff or his wife oppose consolidating this action with Case No. 05-

1527C, they shall notify the court of their opposition and state the reasons

why the court should not consolidate these actions. Their opposition is also

due within 14 days of this order.

(4) The clerk shall renote Defendants’ motion for consolidation (Dkt. # 4) to

December 19, 2005.

(5) The clerk shall enter Plaintiff’s counsel’s November 16, 2005 letter to the

court on the docket in this action. The court construes the letter as a motion

for withdrawal of counsel, which it grants without prejudice to counsel

reappearing after his suspension expires.

Filed and entered this 28th day of November, 2005.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk

s/Mary Duett

By

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01526-JLR Document 8 Filed 11/28/05 Page 2 of 2
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 7, 2013*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**L.102 Nonfinancial Corporate Business** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Francisco LLANTADA-GARCIA, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-30404.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 5, 2005.

Douglas B. Whalley, Esq., Susan M. Roe, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff — Appellee.

*627David B. Koch, Esq., Nielsen Broman *&*Koch, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Defendant — Appellant.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Francisco Llantada-Garcia appeals his conviction for possession of over 50 grams of methamphetamine, with intent to distribute. *See*21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A). The sole ground raised on appeal is ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Although we generally do not review such claims on direct appeal, *see United States v. Vgeri,*51 F.3d 876, 882 (9th Cir.1995), the claim here fits into a recognized exception because “the record is sufficiently developed to permit the reviewing court to resolve the issue.” *United States v. Daly,*974 F.2d 1215, 1218 (9th Cir.1992) (citation omitted). We affirm.

Llantada-Garcia was not prejudiced by his counsel’s allegedly deficient performance. *See Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 697, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (“[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant as a result of the alleged deficiencies.”). The jury heard evidence that a police informant set up a drug purchase from Llantada-Garcia, and that Llantada-Garcia was arrested at the drug purchase delivery location with the methamphetamine in his car. There is no “reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s [allegedly] unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” *Strickland,*466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of Target Acquisitions I, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 2) for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Zhengting Deng, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that:
 
 (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
 
 Dated: September 18, 2012
 
 /s/ Zhengting Deng
 Zhengting Deng
 Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
 
 [A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Target Acquisitions I, Inc. and will be retained by Target Acquisitions I, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES
CONTAINED IN THIS FILING AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         189,145
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  210,710
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,447
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               511,859
<PP&E>                                         166,239
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,872
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 668,242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          355,038
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,099
<OTHER-SE>                                     312,105
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   668,242
<SALES>                                        180,441
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               338,030
<CGS>                                            9,328
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  107,873
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               168,879
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,024
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 65,753
<INCOME-TAX>                                    25,643
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,110
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,110
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32
        

</TABLE>
SERVED AUGUST 29, 2011 

p^PARTMENT Of 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSl^ORTATlON :''A;v3PORlAriON • 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS --'^^' OPER/^TIONS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

M MJG 30 A 9: 33 

IN THE MATTER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Aclion) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0777 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2010SW270072) has been assigned to 

Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other eommunications 

regarding this proceeding shall be ser\'ed on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Scr\'ice List. 

RonAie A. Yoder'' 

Chief Administrative Laji^ Judge 

Attacliment - Service List 
FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0777 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430, 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Thomas Neurton Boiling, Respondenl 's Counsel 

Vice President and Associate General Counsel 

United Airlines and Continental Airlines, Inc., Respondenl 

11 W. Wacker Drive-le'"" Floor 

Chicago, IL 60601 

TEL: 312-997-8068 

FAX: 312-997-8068 

Tim Duff, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel, ASW-7 

Southwest Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 MeachamBlvd. 

Ft. Worth, TX 76193-0007 

TEL 817-222-5099 

FAX 817-222-5945/5092 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administraiivc Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Ad visor 202- 366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use llie following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Allenlion: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
NEWMAN & NEWMAN,

ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP

505 Fifth Ave. S., Ste. 610

Seattle, Washington 98104

(206) 274-2800

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 18th day of October, 2006, I electronically 

filed the foregoing [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER AND CERTIFICATE OF

SERVICE with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system which will send notification of such

filing to the following:

Via Email to:

Robert Siegel, Esq.

Merkle Siegel & Friedrichsen, P.C.

Email: bob@msfseattle.com

 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of

Washington that the forgoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on

October 18th, 2006, at Seattle, Washington.

________________________

Diana Au

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 36-2 Filed 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al Doc. 36 Att. 1

Dockets.Justia.com
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 5, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**L.207 Federal Funds and Security Repurchase Agreements** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
July 18, 1957

No. 61075.

Suit 4894.

#### Esso Standard Oil Co. *v.*United States.

C. D. 1788 affirmed March 29, 1957. C. A. D. 644.
1

Thomas H. Adams, Executive Director 

American Coal Ash Association 

15200 E. Girard Ave., Suite 3050 

Aurora, CO 80014 

720.870.7987 

fax – 720.870.7889 

www.acaa-usa.org 

ACAA 

Memo

To: Mathy Stanislaus, EPA Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

From: Thomas Adams 

CC: Barry Breen, Matt Hale, John Sager 

Date: August 4, 2009 

Re: Stigma Studies 

During our meeting of July 24, 2009, the subject of stigmatization effects on consumer acceptance was 

discussed. The ACAA and its end-user representatives each stated that any type of a Subtitle C 

regulation for disposal of coal ash would stigmatize coal ash as a “hazardous waste”. We believe this 

stigma would severely cripple beneficial uses as consumers would elect to use materials that did not 

include a hazardous waste. A request was made to provide case studies on the subject. 

Unfortunately we cannot find any case history information on this subject. It appears that in order to 

provide this information we would have to engage an academic institution or private consulting firm to 

research the topic. With the aggressive target dates to develop a regulation for coal ash disposal we 

cannot engage a vendor and accomplish this task in time for consideration of the results of such 

research. 

We can point to some important considerations on the stigma issue. 

• While some “hazardous wastes” are widely used by individuals and industry, these materials are 

reprocessed before being released to the marketplace. In some cases the reprocessed 

material is still considered to be a hazardous waste under certain federal and state 

regulations. Coal ash products are not generally reprocessed. 

• For many of the hazardous wastes recycled and resold there are few, if any alternative products 

for the consumer to choose. This is not the case with coal combustion products (CCPs). 

There are competitive products available for virtually each CCP. Marketers of the competitive 

products would use the inference that CCPs are hazardous wastes even if EPA exempted 

certain beneficial uses from hazardous waste regulation. 

• Many of the hazardous wastes currently recycled and resold go into industrial markets 

exclusively. This is not the case with CCPs. CCPs are used in a wide variety of markets 

ranging including agricultural applications to construction of homes and hospitals. Hazardous 

wastes are not welcome in those settings.
No. 61600.

#### Louis Greenberg & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 314051-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of metal dime savings banks the same in all material respects as those the subject of *M. Pressner & Co.*v. *United States*(36 Oust. Ct. 262, C. D. 1784), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>


                                     EXHIBIT 11.1
                                           
                   STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                                           
                 COMPUTATION OF SHARES USED IN PER SHARE CALCULATIONS
                                           

                                                   Quarter Ended March 31,
                                                  -------------------------
(In thousands, except per share data)               1997            1996
                                                  --------       ----------

Weighted average shares of common stock            21,343          18,981

Common stock equivalents                               --           1,367
                                                  --------       ---------

Shares used in calculation of earnings (loss) 
  per share                                        21,343          20,348
                                                  --------       ---------
                                                  --------       ---------

Net income (loss)                                 $  (561)       $  2,551
                                                  --------       ---------
                                                  --------       ---------

Earnings (loss) per share                         $ (0.03)       $   0.13
                                                  --------       ---------
                                                  --------       ---------


                                    -28
Case No. 8,241.

#### LEMON v. BACON.

[4 Cranch, C. C. 466.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

May Term, 1834.

Evidence — Documents—Record Copt.

An absolute deed of goods and chattels need not be recorded, and a record copy is not evidence.

[See Bacon v. Bancroft, Case No. 714; Barger v. Miller, Id. 979.]

[Action for freedom by Kitty Lemon, a ne-gress, against Ebenezer Bacon.)

Mr. Key and Mr. Hodgson, for plaintiff,

offered in evidence the record of a deed of personal property.

Mr. Taylor, for defendant,

objected that a record copy of an absolute deed of goods and chattels, for valuable consideration, need not be recorded, and derives no validity therefrom; and a record copy is not evidence. And such was the opinion of the COURT (nem. con.)

(See statute of frauds of Virginia [1 Rev. Code, 1802] p. 16.)
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 99 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 99

              Authorizing the flying of the POW/MIA flag.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 22, 1998

   Mr. Lott submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
              Authorizing the flying of the POW/MIA flag.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That, for the purpose of section 1082(b)(1)(B) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, the display of the POW/MIA flag 
at the Capitol shall begin at 6:30 p.m. on Sunday, May 24, 1998. As 
used in this section, the term ``POW/MIA flag'' has the same meaning as 
in section 1082 of such Act.
    Sec. 2. The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe regulations with 
respect to the first section of this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
No. 65240.

#### Leyden Customs Expediters, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/14607 and 60/14608 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

The protests were dismissed.