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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.5


                      CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

                   FIRST AMENDMENT TO 1999 STOCK OPTION PLAN



1.  Revised Section 7(d):

          (d)  Amendment and Termination.  The Plan shall take effect on the
Effective Date.  The Board may at any time and from time to time alter, amend,
suspend or terminate the Plan in whole or in part; provided, however, that any
such amendment shall be subject to shareholder approval (i) if and to the extent
such shareholder approval is required by applicable law or in accordance with
the applicable rules of the national securities exchange on which the Stock is
principally traded, (ii) if such amendment would increase the number of shares
of Stock reserved for issuance under the Plan, as provided in the first
paragraph of Section 5, other than pursuant to the adjustment provisions set
forth in the second paragraph of Section 5, (iii) if such amendment would
provide for Awards to be granted to persons other than employees of the Company
and its present and future Subsidiaries and Affiliates, (iv) if such amendment
would materially increase the benefits accruing to Grantees or (v) if such
amendment would eliminate or diminish in any way any of the requirements for
shareholder approval set forth in this Section 7(d) or in Section 7(k).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no amendment, suspension or termination shall
affect adversely any of the rights of any Grantee, without such Grantee's
consent, under any Award theretofore granted under the Plan.  Unless earlier
terminated by the Board pursuant to the provisions of the Plan, the Plan shall
terminate on the tenth anniversary of the Effective Date.  No Awards shall be
granted under the Plan after such termination date.



2.  New Section 7(k):

          (k)  Repricing.  Anything in the Plan to the contrary notwithstanding,
shareholder approval shall be required to (i) decrease the exercise price per
share of Stock subject to an Option or the grant price of an SAR, other than
pursuant to the adjustment provisions set forth in the second paragraph of
Section 5, or (ii) cancel an Option or an SAR in exchange for the grant of a new
Option or SAR with a lower exercise or grant price.
1

The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2821

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Scott Donald Wiele, * District of Minnesota.

*

Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________

Submitted: October 5, 2007

Filed: October 31, 2007

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Scott Donald Wiele appeals the 108-month prison sentence the district court1

imposed after he pleaded guilty to mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (Count

1); wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Count 2); and money laundering, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a) (Count 3). In a brief filed under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), his counsel argues that Wiele’s sentence is

unreasonable because the court failed to consider the mitigating factors presented at

sentencing, and improperly weighed the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
-2-

We enforce the appeal waiver included in Wiele’s plea agreement: the plea

colloquy reflects that Wiele understood and voluntarily accepted the terms of the plea

agreement, including the waiver; this appeal falls within the scope of the waiver; and

no injustice would result. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.

2003) (en banc) (discussing enforceability of appeal waiver); see also United States

v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (enforcing

appeal waiver in Anders case). 

After reviewing the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), we affirm the judgment of the district court. We grant counsel’s

withdrawal motion, and we deny Wiele’s pending motion to stay the appeal.

______________________________
05/31/2011 12:4G FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS g|001/002 

UNITED STATES DEFAR I'MENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

In the Matter of: 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 

TAA Docket No. CP10NM0008 

FAA Case No. 2008NM700208 • 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0792 1 

Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

L..J 

The Honorable Richurd C. Goodwin: 

WITHDRAWAL OF REQUEST FOR HEARING 

Respondent FKDF.RAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, by and through counsel, pursuant 

10 Rule 215 of the Rules of Praciiee in FAA Civil Penalty Actions (14 CFR 13.215), requests a 

withdrawal of its Request for Hearing, as the Administrator and the Respondent have settled this 

matter. 

Dated this 26"' day of May, 2011. 

I til CEIVED 

:Ar 3 i 2011 

HEARING DOCKET 

in P^Wicks 

Loncevert D. Almond 

The Wicks Group, PLLC 

1215 17"^ Street, NW 

Sumner Annex, Fourth Floor 

Washington, DC 20036 

Tel: (202) 4.57-7790 

Fax:(202)457-7799 

Cynthia Chandler-Snell 

Federal Express Corporation 

Regulatory Division 

3620 Hacks Cross Road 

Building B, 3"^ Floor 

Memphis, TK 38125 

Tel: 901-434-8361 

Fax:901-434-8283 

Ctyunsel for Respondents 
05/31/2011 12:46 FAX 2024935142 FAA DMS 2)002/002 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing document has been sent via facsimile and expedited 

courier service to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention; Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Fax:(202)493-5142 

The Honorable Richiud C. Goodwin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Fast Building Ground Floor, Rm El2-320 

Washington, D.C 20590 

Tel: (202) 366-2139 

Fax:(202)366-7536 

Mr. Scoil Morris, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Admini strati on 

Office of the Regional Counsel (ANM-7) 

1601 Lind Ave., S.W. 

Rcnton, WA 98057 

Tel: (425) 227-1417 

Fax:(425)227-1007 

Original and one (1) copy 

One (1) copy 

One (1) copy 

Dated this 26'*' day of May, 2011. 

Almonc 

'Wiclcs Group, PLLC 

1215 17''Street, NW 

Sumner Annex, Fourth Floor 

Washington, DC 20036 

Tel: (202) 457-7790 

Fax: (202) 457-7799 

Counsel for Respondent
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION



### November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 3

- 0 0 554

- C V

Style: Robert Pearson

v

. Roger Kroschel, III , Individually and as Representative of Rockin’ R Trucking

Date motion filed * : November 1 9 , 201 3

Type of motion: Motion to exten d time to file the reporter’s record and evidence

Party filing motion: Appellee

Document to be filed: Reporter’s record

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: October 1 , 2013

Number of previous extensions granted: Current Due date:

Date Requested: February 18, 2014

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due:

 T he Court will not grant additional motions to extend time absent extraordinary circumstances.

 Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot )

 Other: _____________________________________

On October 21, 2013, the Clerk of this Court notified the parties that a reporter’s record had not been filed

. If

additional time is necessary, the Court may extend the deadline to file the reporter’s record if the court reporter

r equests. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.3.(c). The court reporter has filed a request for an extension. Accordingly , we

dismiss appellee’s motion.

Judge ’ s signature: /s/ Jim Sharp

 Acting for the Court

Panel consists of

____________________________________________

Date: December 10, 2013
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.29

                    CONTINENTAL CAPITAL & EQUITY CORPORATION
                                   SUITE 200
                             195 WEKIVA SPRINGS RD.
                               LONGWOOD, FL 32779

                              PHONE (407) 682-2001
                              FAX   (407) 682-2544


December 15, 1999



Michael Forster
SmartSources.com
1288 Pear Avenue Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94043

RE:      LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING

Dear Mr. Forster:

This letter shall serve as a formal understanding between Continental Capital &
Equity corporation ("CCEC") and SmartSources.com ("Company") amending Section 4
of the Client Service Agreement executed December 8, 1999, to include the
following terms:

         (B) CCEC has an option to purchase from the Company two hundred
thousand (200,000) shares of the Company's common stock as follows: fifty
thousand (50,000) shares at a per share price of five dollars twenty five cents
($5.25); fifty thousand (50,000) shares at a per share price of six dollars
($6.00); fifty thousand (50,000) shares at a per share price of seven dollars
fifty cents ($7.50); and fifty thousand (50,000) shares at a per share price of
eight dollars ($8.00).  The options shall expire 36 months from the execution
date of this agreement.  The Company agrees to register the underlying shares
pursuant to the terms and conditions of the attached Registration Rights
Agreement.

To confirm that this is also your understanding, please sign in the space
provided below.

Sincerely,

CONTINENTAL CAPITAL & EQUITY CORPORATION


/s/ JIMMY HOLTON

Jimmy Holton
Executive Vice President


Agreed this 15th day of December 1999.

SMARTSOURCES.COM


/s/ MICHAEL FORSTER
-------------------------
Michael Forster
Annual
      Statement as to Compliance


For
      the
      Year Ended December 31, 2005




**JPMC**


**Series
      2005 CIBC12**




Pursuant
      to Section 3.13 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement governing the referenced transaction,
      I hereby attest that:




i.   
      A review of the activities of GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation as Master Servicer
      during the period, and of its performance under this Trust and
      Servicing Agreement,
      has been made under my supervision.




ii. 
       To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, GMAC Commercial
      Mortgage Corporation
      as Master Servicer, has fulfilled in all material respects its
      obligations under
      this Pooling and Servicing Agreement throughout the period.




iii. GMAC
      Commercial Mortgage Corporation, as Servicer, has received no
      notice regarding
      qualifications, or challenging the status, of any REMIC Pool as a REMIC
      or the
      status of either Grantor Trust Pool as a Grantor Trust or otherwise asserting
      a
      tax on t he
      income
      or assets of any portion of the Trust Fund from the Internal Revenue
      Service or
      any
      other governmental agency or body.




GMAC
      COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION




/s/Mark
      E. McCool




By:     
      Mark E. McCool


Title:  
      Senior Vice President


Date:  
      February 20, 2006




Inv.
      169
      A




200
      Witmer
      Road - PO. Box 1315 - Horsham, PA 19044-8015
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 11, 2015*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.220 Commercial Mortgages** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 124

Expressing the sense of the Congress relating to recent allegations of espionage and illegal campaign financing that have brought into question

the loyalty and probity of Americans of Asian ancestry.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 27, 1999

Mr. WU (for himself, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. BONIOR, Mr.

BROWN of Ohio, Mr. CLAY, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. COX, Mr. DICKS, Mr.

FALEOMAVAEGA, Mr. GEPHARDT, Mr. HOLT, Mr. KUYKENDALL, Mr.

LARSON, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. MINK of Hawaii, Ms.

PELOSI, Mr. STARK, Mr. SWEENEY, Mr. WAXMAN, and Mr. WYNN) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress relating to recent allegations of espionage and illegal campaign financing that

have brought into question the loyalty and probity of

Americans of Asian ancestry.

Whereas the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are truths we hold as self-evident;

Whereas all Americans are entitled to the equal protection of

law;

Whereas Americans of Asian ancestry have made profound

contributions to American life, including the arts, our
2

•HCON 124 IH

economy, education, the sciences, technology, politics, and

sports, among others;

Whereas Americans of Asian ancestry have demonstrated

their patriotism by honorably serving to defend the

United States in times of armed conflict, from the Civil

War to the present; and

Whereas due to recent allegations of espionage and illegal

campaign financing, the loyalty and probity of Americans

of Asian ancestry has been questioned: Now, therefore, be

it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—

3 (1) no Member of Congress or any other Amer4 ican should generalize or stereotype the actions of an

5 individual to an entire group of people;

6 (2) Americans of Asian ancestry are entitled to

7 all rights and privileges afforded to all Americans;

8 and

9 (3) the Attorney General, the Secretary of En10 ergy, and the Commissioner of the Equal Employ11 ment Opportunity Commission should, within their

12 respective jurisdictions, vigorously enforce the secu13 rity of America’s national laboratories and inves14 tigate all allegations of discrimination in public or

15 private workplaces.

Æ
# C_2019039EN.01001002.xml

| 1.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/10

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9135 — The Blackstone Group/Luminor Bank)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 39/03)

On 21 January 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9135. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9135. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
No. 53348.

protests 110050-K, etc. (St. Louis).

#### Denebeim Distilling Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars                 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           JUN-30-1997    
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-01-1996      
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1996   
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                       1
<CASH>                                           15,852
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    13,364
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                       3,432
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 41,936
<PP&E>                                           14,215
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6,672
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   56,072
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             8,363
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                            278
<OTHER-SE>                                       47,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     56,072
<SALES>                                          11,120
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 11,312
<CGS>                                             3,930
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     3,930
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 12,638
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (5,256)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (1,871)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,385)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.23)
                                                


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 4(b)



                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

          The undersigned, the trustees of TARGETS TRUST VII, desiring to form a
business trust pursuant to Delaware Business Trust Act, 12 Del. C. Section 3810,
hereby certify as follows:

          (a) The name of the business trust being formed hereby (the "Trust")
     is "TARGETS TRUST VII".

          (b) The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust which
     has its principal place of business in the State of Delaware is as follows:

          Chase Manhattan Bank Delaware
          1201 Market Street
          Wilmington, Delaware  19801

          (c) This Certificate of Trust shall be effective as of the date of
     filing.

Dated:  March 10, 2000
                                        /s/ MICHAEL J. DAY
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Michael J. Day, Regular Trustee

                                        /s/ CHARLES W. SCHARF
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Charles W. Scharf, Regular Trustee

                                         /s/ MARK I. KLEINMAN
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Mark I. Kleinman, Regular Trustee

                                     CHASE MANHATTAN BANK DELAWARE,
                                     as Delaware Trustee


                                     By:  /s/ DENIS KELLY
                                        -----------------------------------
                                     Name:   Denis Kelly
                                     Title:  Assistant Vice President

                                     SALOMON SMITH BARNEY HOLDINGS
                                     INC., as Sponsor

                                     By:  /s/ MICHAEL J. DAY
                                        -----------------------------------
                                     Name:  Michael J. Day
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

July Term 2014

CONNIE PEDERSON a/k/a CONNIE L. PEDERSON

, Appellant,

v.

SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC.

,

Appellee

.

No. 4D 13

- 4593

[September 3, 2014 ]

On Confession of Error

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit,

Indian River County ; Cynthia L. Cox , Judge; L.T. Case No.

312012CA000200

.

Leo W. Desmond, Vero Beach, for appellant.

Alexandra de Alejo of Gray Robinson, P.A., Miami

, and David S. Hendrix

of Gray Robinson, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

A homeowner appeals a final judgment of foreclosure. The bank has

filed a Confession of Error based upon Lurtz v. Bank of New York Mello n

, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D524 (Fla. 4th DCA Mar

. 12, 2014). We therefore reverse

and remand the case for further proceedings. We do not express “ any opinion as to the extent of the error.” Gulf Power Co. v. Illinois

- Florida Land

Co. , 132 So. 109, 110 (Fla. 1931).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

S TEVENSON

, T

AYLOR and M AY

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.2
Case No. 14,302.

#### TWO THOUSAND BOTTLES OF LIQUORS.

[5 Ben. 265.] 1

District Court, N. D. New York.

June, 1871.

INTERNA!, REVENUE — WHOLESALE LIQUOR DEALER —Rectifier and Distiller.

Under the 44th section of the internal revenue act of July 20, 1868 (15 Stat. 142), the wine and distilled spirits owned by a wholesale liquor dealer, are not forfeited by reason of his not having paid the special tax. That forfeiture is applica? ble to the wines and spirits of distillers and rectifiers only.

This was an application for a new trial. The action was brought to forfeit the property under the 44th section of the internal revenue act of July 20, 1868. The proof showed that the claimant had carried on the business of a wholesale liquor dealer without having paid the tax required by law. A decree of forfeiture having been made, a motion was made for a new trial.

BENEDICT, District Judge.

I am of the opinion that the 44th section of the act of .July 20, 1868 (15 Stat. 142), cannot be held to forfeit the wines and distilled spirits owned by a wholesale liquor dealer wherever found, by reason of the fact that the dealer has carried on the business of a wholesale liquor dealer without having paid the special tax as required by law.

The words of the section “and all distilled spirits or wines, and all stills or other apparatus fit or intended to be used for the distillation or rectification of spirits, or for the compounding of spirits, or owned by such person, wherever found, and all distilled spirits or wines and personal property found in the distillery or rectifying establishment shall be forfeited,” must be held applicable to distillers and rectifiers only. The section, taken as a whole, does not indicate an intention to inflict upon a wholesale liquor dealer a forfeiture of his whole stock for an omission to pay the special tax as required by law; and the words “such person,” are intended to refer to those classes, and not to all the classes of persons previously mentioned.

The proof that the claimant was a wholesale liquor dealer was not, therefore, sufficient to warrant the direction of a verdict, and there must be a new trial.