alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.35
                             AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE
                          1997 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN OF
                                  AMETEK, INC.


         WHEREAS, AMETEK, Inc. (formerly known as Ametek Aerospace Products,
Inc.) (the "Company") has adopted the 1997 Stock Incentive Plan of AMETEK, Inc.
(formerly known as the 1997 Stock Incentive Plan of Ametek Aerospace Products,
Inc.) (the "Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, Section 19 of the Plan permits the Committee, as defined in
the Plan (the "Committee"), to amend the Plan; and

         WHEREAS, the Committee now desires to amend the Plan in certain
respects;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

         1. Section 13 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following
sentence after the first sentence in the second paragraph thereof:

         "Moreover, the Committee may, in its sole discretion, provide, with
         respect to an Option or Rights granted to any individual (and either at
         the time of grant of such Option or Rights or by an amendment
         thereafter to any such outstanding Option or Rights), that the
         post-termination exercise period shall be for a period of time
         specified by the Committee which is longer than the period which would
         otherwise apply pursuant to this Section 13, but in no event beyond the
         expiration of the stated term of such Option or Rights."

         2. The provisions of this Amendment shall become effective as of July
22, 1998 and may apply to Option and Rights granted or outstanding on or after
that date, including, without limitation, outstanding Options and Rights which
were granted prior to that date.


<PAGE>   2

         3. Except to the extent hereinabove set forth, the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect.


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Committee has caused this Amendment to be
executed by a duly authorized officer of the Company, and its corporate seal to
be affixed, as of the 22nd day of July, 1998.



                                            AMETEK, Inc.
                                            By: /s/ John J. Molinelli
                                                --------------------------
ATTEST:

/s/ Donna F. Winquist
----------------------
(SEAL)
No. P67/352.

#### Kaytee Imports, Inc. *v.*United States, protests 63/15027, etc. (New York).

Watson, J.

In accordance witli stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of light sets similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Gallagher & Ascher Company*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 348, C.D. 2813), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22455]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK


Sunshine Act Meetings

    Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-
Import Bank of the United States (EXIM).

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, October 18, 2023, from 4:30-6:00 p.m. EDT.

PLACE: Washington Hilton Hotel, 1919 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, 
DC 20009.

STATUS: Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public 
participation and time will be allotted for questions or comments. 
Members of the public may also file written statements before or after 
the meeting to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#12776a6677607c737e52776a7b7f3c757d64"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8feaf7fbeafde1eee3cfeaf7e6e2a1e8e0f9">[email protected]</span></a>. Interested parties may contact India 
Walker at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#553c3b313c347b2234393e302715302d3c387b323a23"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91f8fff5f8f0bfe6f0fdfaf4e3d1f4e9f8fcbff6fee7">[email protected]</span></a> to confirm attendance.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Discussion of EXIM policies and programs to 
provide competitive financing to expand United States exports and 
comments for inclusion in EXIM's Report to the U.S. Congress on Global 
Export Credit Competition.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information, contact 
India Walker, External Enagagement Specialist, at 202-480-0062 or at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3f56515b565e11485e53545a4d7f5a47565211585049"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="50393e3439317e27313c3b3522103528393d7e373f26">[email protected]</span></a>.

Joyce B. Stone,
Assistant Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-22455 Filed 10-5-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**Rule 13a-14(a) Certification by the Chief Financial Officer**

I, Michael Schradle, certify that: 

          1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Micro Linear Corporation;

          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;

          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;

          4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

          5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

| Date: May   17, 2006 |   |
|----------------------|--------|
|                 |   |   |
|                 | By:    | /s/ Michael   W. Schradle |
|                 |   |  |
|                 |   | Michael W.   Schradle |
|                 |   | Chief   Financial Officer |
|                 |   | (Principal   Financial and Accounting Officer) |
Before the First Division,

March 5, 1958

No. 61615.

#### Lunham & Reeve, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 167140-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of goatskins and sheepskins the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Nawi Noonoo & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 57, C. D. 1904), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32-1



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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund III, L.P. (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended June
30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18
U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr., President
and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership’s general partner, hereby certify
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 Partnership.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/ WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.                                      | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.                                          | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
|                                                                | 
|Date: August 14, 2012                                           |
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69279-69285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22107]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12204]


Notice of Department of State Sanctions Actions

SUMMARY: The Department of State is publishing the names of one or more 
persons that have been placed on the Department of Treasury's List of 
Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) 
administered by the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) based on the 
Department of State's determination that one or more applicable legal 
criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject 
to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are 
generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.

DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for applicable date(s).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aaron P. Forsberg, Director, Office of 
Economic Sanctions Policy and Implementation, Bureau of Economic and 
Business Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC 20520, tel.: 
(202) 647 7677, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#96d0f9e4e5f4f3e4f1d7c6d6e5e2f7e2f3b8f1f9e0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="90d6ffe2e3f2f5e2f7d1c0d0e3e4f1e4f5bef7ffe6">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The SDN List and additional information concerning sanctions 
programs are available on OFAC's website.

Notice of Department of State Actions

    On August 24, 2023, the Department of State determined that the 
property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the 
following persons are blocked under the relevant sanction's authority 
listed below.
BILLING CODE 4710-AE-P

[[Page 69280]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN05OC23.079


[[Page 69281]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN05OC23.080


[[Page 69282]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN05OC23.081


[[Page 69283]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN05OC23.082


[[Page 69284]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN05OC23.083



[[Page 69285]]


Roland F. de Marcellus,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic and 
Business Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-22107 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-AE-C


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

BALJINDER KAUR RANDHAWA,

Plaintiff,

v.

PUNJAB PALACE, INC. dba INDIA MAHAL

RESTAURANT, SATNAM RANDHAWA and

DOES 1-3, inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5300FDB

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT AND DECLINING TO

EXERCISE SUPPLEMENTAL

JURISDICTION OVER AND

DISMISSING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE REMAINING STATE

CLAIMS

Plaintiff brings federal and state claims for wages and other compensation for her work in the

family restaurant, along with claims under Washington law for breach of contract, invasion of privacy

based on identity theft, and both negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. 

Defendant moves for summary judgment on all claims. Plaintiff does not dispute that

summary judgment is appropriate on her Federal claim based on the Fair Labor Standards Act

violations. As a result, only claims based on State law remain, and Plaintiff requests that this court

dismiss her Federal claim and decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her State claims,

dismissing them without prejudice in order that she may refile them in State court. 

Case 3:06-cv-05300-FDB Document 42 Filed 08/09/07 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 ORDER - 2

The Federal claim in this case being subject to dismissal, the parties being in agreement that

the Federal wage claim should be dismissed, leaving only claims under State law, this Court declines

to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and will dismiss the State claims without prejudice. See 28

U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. # 29]of dismissal is GRANTED IN

PART as to Plaintiff’s claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as it is unopposed by Plaintiff;

Defendants’ Motion as to the remaining claims under State law is DENIED; 

2. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining claims under

State law, and they are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 

3. Defendants’ Motion to Allow Late Filed Reply [Dkt. # 38] is GRANTED;

4. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in accordance with this Order and to close this

case.

DATED this 9th day of August, 2007.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05300-FDB Document 42 Filed 08/09/07 Page 2 of 2
No. 54423.

#### Alberto Hernandez *v.*United States,

petition 6684-R (Tampa).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

When this case was called for trial, petitioner requested permission to discontinue the action. The petition was therefore dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 25 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 25

   To express the sense of the Senate that the United States Postal 
 Service should issue a series of stamps highlighting achievements of 
young Americans, including Samantha Smith of Manchester, Maine, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 23, 1997

Ms. Snowe submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   To express the sense of the Senate that the United States Postal 
 Service should issue a series of stamps highlighting achievements of 
young Americans, including Samantha Smith of Manchester, Maine, and for 
                            other purposes.

Whereas the youth of America face more difficult challenges than ever 
        before, with the lure of gangs, drugs, alcohol, and sex 
        increasing the potential for irresponsible behavior and 
        violence at ever earlier ages;
Whereas all too often the media focuses on negative stories about 
        America's youth;
Whereas many young Americans have made extraordinary contributions to 
        their communities and to their country;
Whereas 10-year-old Samantha Smith of Manchester, Maine, wrote to 
        Chairman Yuri Andropov of the Soviet Union in 1982 urging peace 
        at the height of the Cold War;
Whereas Samantha was invited by Chairman Andropov to visit the Soviet 
        Union the following year and became widely recognized as a 
        spokesperson for the cause of peace until her death in a plane 
        crash in 1985; and
Whereas America's young people need positive role models from among 
        their peers: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the United States 
Postal Service should issue a series of postage stamps highlighting the 
extraordinary achievements of young Americans and that a stamp honoring 
Samantha Smith of Manchester, Maine, should be the first in this 
series.
                                 <all>
```
No. P66/320. —

#### Ross Products, Inc. *v.*United States, protest 63/6274 (New York).

*827Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of iron wall ornaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of Hensel, *Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 112, C.D. 2289), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### Abraham Branch, Respondent, v Abraham and Strauss Department Store, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

[632 NYS2d *475168]

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for assault, malicious prosecution, and false imprisonment, the defendant Abraham and Strauss Department Store appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.), dated March 1, 1994, which denied its motion for leave to serve an amended answer interposing the affirmative defense of res judicata and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the basis of that defense.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

While leave to amend a pleading should be freely given *(see,*CPLR 3025 [b]), the decision as to whether to grant such leave is generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court *(see, Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York,*60 NY2d 957, 959; *Kramer & Sons v Facilities Dev. Corp.,*135 AD2d 942; *Fulford v Baker Perkins, Inc.,*100 AD2d 861), and its determination will not be lightly set aside *(see, Beuschel v Malm,*114 AD2d 569). In exercising its discretion, the court should consider how long the amending party was aware of the facts upon which the motion was predicated, whether a reasonable excuse for the delay was offered, and whether prejudice resulted therefrom *(see, Caruso v Anpro, Ltd.,*215 AD2d 713; *Pellegrino v New York City Tr. Auth.,*177 AD2d 554, 557).

In the instant case, the defendant moved to amend its answer in January 1994 to assert the defense of res judicata based upon an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Ohio, dated January 1991. Despite the three-year delay in moving for leave to amend and even though the plaintiff had undertaken the time and expense of conducting discovery, the defendant failed to offer any explanation for its dilatory motion. In addition, the defendant’s motion papers failed to establish that the plaintiffs claim was encompassed by the scope of the Bankruptcy Court’s order. Moreover, the defendant failed to submit a copy of its proposed amended answer with the motion for the trial court’s review *(see, Goldner Trucking Corp. v Stoll Packing Corp.,*12 AD2d 639). Accordingly, it cannot be said that the trial court’s determination to deny leave to amend was an improvident exercise of discretion *(see, Caruso v Anpro, supra; Moeller v Astor Chocolate Corp.,*214 AD2d 548; *Olewnik v Bernstein,*212 AD2d 982; *Rose v Velletri,*202 AD2d 566).

Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant’s reliance on *Corsale v Pantry Pride Supermarket*(197 AD2d 659) is misplaced. Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

FIRST AMENDED PRETRIAL ORDER

PAGE -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

HIEP T. NGO,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. C05-1841-RSM-MAT

(CR04-006-RSM)

FIRST AMENDED PRETRIAL

ORDER

This matter is scheduled for an evidentiary hearing on March 1, 2007 at 1:30 p.m., with

an exchange of trial briefs and exhibits by 4:00pm on February 26, 2007. The Court also finds that

a modified proposed pretrial order would be helpful. Accordingly, the parties shall submit, on or

before February 26, 2007, a proposed pretrial order conforming with Local Civil Rule 16.1 and

addressing the following: claims and defenses; admitted facts and contentions; issues of law;

witnesses; and exhibits. 

DATED this 3rd day of January, 2007.

A

Mary Alice Theiler

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-01841-RSM Document 22 Filed 01/03/07 Page 1 of 1