alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2

Entity              Date       Cost Per Share        Proceeds     No. of Shares
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seidman & Assoc    1/7/02         28.2900           240,507.50          8,500
Subtotal                                            240,507.50          8,500


SIP                1/7/02         28.2900           120,253.75          4,250
Subtotal                                            120,253.75          4,250

SIP II             1/7/02         28.2900           120,253.75          4,250
Subtotal                                            120,253.75          4,250

Federal Holdings   1/7/02         28.2900           120,253.75          4,250
Subtotal                                            120,253.75          4,250

Kerri-Matt         1/7/02         28.2900           120,253.75          4,250
Subtotal                                            120,253.75          4,250

Pollack Invest Pr  1/7/02         28.2900           123,083.25          4,350
Subtotal                                            123,083.25          4.350

Lawrence Seidman   1/7/02         28.2900           120,253.75          4,250
Subtotal                                            120,253.75          4,250

Williamson        12/4/01         27.1100            13,554.00            500
Williamson         1/7/02         29.0800            14,540.00            500
Williamson         1/7/02         29.0200            29,020.00          1,000
Williamson         1/3/02         28.7300           (22,987.50)          (800)
Subtotal                                             34,126.50          1,200
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                               998,986.00         35,300
EXHIBIT 4.14  ENGLISH LANGUAGE SUMMARY OF THE MATERIAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES, DATED AS OF JANUARY 25, 2011, BETWEEN LA FONTE TELECOM  S.A. AND BRATEL BRASIL S.A. AND, AS INTERVENING PARTIES, EDSP75 PARTICIPAÇÕES S.A., LF TEL S.A. AND PORTUGAL TELECOM, SGPS S.A.  ·Sale of Shares and Price:La Fonte Telecom S.A. (the Seller) agreed to sell to Bratel Brasil S.A. (the Buyer), an affiliate of Portugal Telecom, 45,096,035 ordinary shares, or 4.69% of the voting and total share capital of EDSP75 Participações S.A. (EDSP75), the parent company of LF TEL S.A., a shareholder of Telemar Participações S.A. (TmarPart), for R$212,142,540.57.  The sale was subject to a number of conditions, including the concurrent acquisitions and/or subscriptions of shares of Pasa Participações S.A., EDSP75, TmarPart, Tele Norte Leste Participações S.A. and Telemar Norte Leste S.A. (Telemar) so as to guarantee that the Buyer would hold a minimum direct and indirect interest in Telemar of 22.38%.  ·Indemnification:The Seller agreed to indemnify the Buyer for liabilities arising from breaches of representations and warranties, certain liabilities of EDSP75 and LF TEL S.A. emerging from facts, acts or omissions that took place up to the date of the closing (other than those identified in the applicable financial statements) and dispossession of or defects in the title to the shares. The Sellers indemnification obligation is limited to a five-year period and it is capped at the acquisition price (except with respect to breach of certain representations and warranties and the dispossession of or defects in the title to the shares which shall follow their respective statute of limitation and it is not subject to a cap).  The Buyer agreed to indemnify the Seller for breaches of representations and warranties relating to the Buyer.  ·Representations, Warranties and Agreements:The contract contained customary representations, warranties and agreements typical of merger and acquisition transactions.  ·Termination:The contract allowed the Buyer and the Seller to terminate it under specified circumstances.  It also provides for automatic termination in certain extraordinary circumstances, such as bankruptcy of any of the parties.  The agreement was not terminated, and the transaction closed on March 28, 2011.  ·Governing Law and Dispute Resolution:The agreement is governed by Brazilian law.  Any dispute under the agreement is to be resolved through arbitration in Brazil.  Portugal Telecom will provide a copy of the Portuguese language agreement to the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
#### Charles A. ADDISON, Petitioner, v. Robert J. GARLICK, Jr., d/b/a Garlick’s Service Station & Omega Oil Company, Auto-Owners Insurance Company and the Florida Department of Commerce, Respondents.

No. 40655.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 19, 1971.

Howard N. Pelzner, Miami, for petitioner.

Lally, Miller & Hodges, Coral Gables, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

We granted certiorari in this case, and after hearing oral argument and considering the record we find the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims is based on competent substantial evidence under our rule as stated in United States Casualty *165Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 55 So.2d 741 (Fla.1951). It was therefore error for the Industrial Relations Commission to reverse the same. Hence, the ruling of the Industrial Relations Commission is quashed, with directions to reinstate the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Sydney GOTTLIEB, Appellant, v. Mortimer GOTTLIEB, Appellee.

No. 68-987.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

April 29, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7445
CHARLES WARNER JONES, a/k/a Charles Jones, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS COMMISSIONERS; SERGEANT MCDONALD; CO II SELLMAN; CO II SOFELLO; CO IV PAINTER; JAMES PEGUESE, Each Defendant is hereby sued individually and severally, Defendants - Appellees, and SECURITY OFFICER STITCH, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA03-412-RDB) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 8, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Charles Jones, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Charles Jones appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Jones v. Maryland Dep’t of Corr. Comm’rs , No. CA-03-412-RDB (D. Md. Aug. 26, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Injection Well Plugging Plan for FutureGen Alliance 

Permit Number: IL-137-6A-0004 (Well #4) Page D1of 3

ATTACHMENT D: INJECTION WELL PLUGGING PLAN 

Facility Name: FutureGen 2.0 Morgan County CO2 Storage Site 

IL-137-6A-0004 (Well #4)

Facility Contacts: Kenneth Humphreys, Chief Executive Officer, 

FutureGen Industrial Alliance, Inc., Morgan County Office, 

73 Central Park Plaza East, Jacksonville, IL 62650, 217-243-8215 

Location of Injection Well: Morgan County, IL; 26−16N−9W; 39.80111oN and 90.07544oW

The FutureGen Alliance shall comply with the reporting and notification provisions in 

40 CFR 146.92.

Immediately Prior to Well Plugging:

Per the requirements at 40 CFR 146.92, The FutureGen Alliance must:

1. Flush each injection well with a buffer fluid;

2. Determine the bottomhole reservoir pressure using methods and procedures identified in 

Attachment C – Testing and Monitoring Plan; and

3. Demonstrate external mechanical integrity using methods and procedures identified in 

Attachment C – Testing and Monitoring Plan.

Information on Plugs:

Cementing to Plug and 

Abandon Data Plug #1 Plug #2 Plug #3 Plug #4 Plug #5 Plug #6 Plug #7

Diameter of Boring in 

Which Plug Will Be Placed

(in)

7 7 7 7 7 7

Depth to Bottom of Tubing 

or Drill Pipe (MD) (ft)

6,004 or 

7,004(a) 3,900 3,100 1,800 1,500 700

Sacks of Cement to Be 

Used (each plug) (sks)

451 or 

665(a) 149 0 53 0 124

Slurry Volume to Be 

Pumped (ft3)

505 or 

745(a) 167 271 63 167 146

Slurry Weight (lb/ft3) 15.8 15.8 8.6 15.6 8.6 15.6

Top of Plug (MD) (ft) 3,900 3,100 1,800 1,500 700 0

Bottom of Plug (MD) (ft) 6,004 or 

7,004(a) 3,900 3,100 1,800 1,500 700

Type of Cement or Other 

Material EverCrete EverCrete 6% Gel Class A 6% Gel Class A

Method of Emplacement 

(e.g., balance method, 

retainer method, or twoplug method)

Balance Method

(a) This value applies to injection wells completed with a 2,500 ft lateral.

MD = measured depth. 
Injection Well Plugging Plan for FutureGen Alliance 

Permit Number: IL-137-6A-0004 (Well #4) Page D2of 3

Figure 1. Diagram of Injection Well after Plugging and Abandonment (geology and depths 

shown in this diagram are based on site-specific characterization data obtained from the 

FutureGen 2.0 Stratigraphic Well).
Injection Well Plugging Plan for FutureGen Alliance 

Permit Number: IL-137-6A-0004 (Well #4) Page D3of 3
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 


FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 


ELAINE AND VICTOR SWANGER, 

as parents and legal guardians of 

B.J.S., and B.J.S., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 4:11-CV-894 

(JUDGE MARIANI) 

WARRIOR RUN 

SCHOOL DISTRICT, et aI., 

Defendants. 

ORDER 

AND NOW THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015, upon consideration of the Motion 

for Summary Judgment by Defendants Diversified Treatment Alternatives and Alvin Weaver 

("Mental Health Defendants") (Doc. 133) and all accompanying briefs and exhibits, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. 	 The Mental Health Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 133) is GRANTED. 

Judgment is hereby accordingly entered IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS Diversified 

Treatment Alternatives and Alvin Weaver and AGAINST PLAINTIFFS B.J.S. and Elaine 

Swanger and Victor Swanger as parents and legal guardians of B.J.S. 

2. 	 In light of the Court's grant of the Mental Health Defendants' summary judgment motion, 

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine (Doc. 122) to exclude from evidence the proffered report, 

opinions, and testimony of Mental Health Defendants':..ateer:tAlian Tepper, J.D., Psy.D. is 

DENIED AS MOOT. 

Case 4:11-cv-00894-RDM Document 171 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          20,612
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,612
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,612
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,840
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,170
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,602
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,612
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,833
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,833)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.004)


</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 9, 2016

NO. 03

- 15

- 00713

- CV

Brian DeRoeck, Melinda Young, and Kathryn Boykin, as co

- trustees of the Walter A. DeRoeck QTIP Trust, Assignee of Texas Capital Bank National Asso ciation, Appellant s

v.

DHM Ventures, LLC; James W. Moritz; and Nathan W. Halsey, Appellee s

APPEAL FROM 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GO ODWIN, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on August 24, 2015. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt h olds that there was no reversible error

in the judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. A ppellant s shall pay all

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR

                      RULE 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the quarterly  report of Pangea  Petroleum  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Scott
Duncan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
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 results of operations of the Company.


Date: May 15, 2006                         By: /s/ Scott Duncan
                                               ------------------------
                                               Scott Duncan
                                               Chief Financial Officer

                                                                              13
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2787 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2787

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To authorize the Federal Communications Commission to process 
applications for spectrum licenses from applicants who were successful 
bidders in an auction before the authority of the Commission to conduct 
                   auctions expired on March 9, 2023.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``5G Spectrum Authority Licensing 
Enforcement Act'' or the ``5G SALE Act''.

SEC. 2. FCC PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECTRUM LICENSES AWARDED BY 
              AUCTION.

    In the case of any applicant for a license or permit for the use of 
spectrum in the band of frequencies between 2496 megahertz and 2690 
megahertz, inclusive, that the Federal Communications Commission 
selected through a system of competitive bidding conducted under 
section 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 309(j)) on 
or before March 9, 2023, and to whom the Commission has not granted the 
license or permit as of the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Commission may process the application of the applicant during the 90-
day period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.

            Passed the Senate September 21, 2023.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
118th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 2787

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

     To authorize the Federal Communications Commission to process 
applications for spectrum licenses from applicants who were successful 
bidders in an auction before the authority of the Commission to conduct 
                   auctions expired on March 9, 2023.
```
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IMAD M. IDRES, : CIVIL No. 4: 05-CV-00717

:

Petitioner : (Judge McClure)

:

v. : (Magistrate Judge Smyser)

:

WARDEN THOMAS HOGAN, :

:

Respondent :

O R D E R

May 6, 2005

BACKGROUND:

On April 11, 2005, Imad M. Idres, a prisoner in the York County Prison,

filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The

petitioner is seeking to vacate a conviction and sentence he received in the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The petition was originally referred to United States Magistrate Judge J.

Andrew Smyser.

On April 14, 2005, Magistrate Judge Smyser filed a 5-page report and

recommendation recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus be

dismissed and that the case file be closed. No objections have been filed to the

report and recommendation.

Case 4:05-cv-00717-JFM Document 5 Filed 05/06/05 Page 1 of 2
2

Magistrate Judge Smyser correctly noted that petitioner raises claims that

normally should be brought by way of a § 2255 motion. The report and

recommendation also observed that petitioner has not argued that a § 2255 motion

would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. Therefore,

Idres may not proceed with his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. See United States v.

Brooks, 230 F.3d 643, 646-49 (3d Cir. 2000) (discussing instances where a

petitioner’s recourse to a petition under § 2241 might be granted by a court on

matters typically filed in motions under § 2255).

Accordingly, the report and recommendation will be adopted in full for the

reasons set forth therein.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

1. The report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge J.

Andrew Smyser (Rec. Doc. No. 3), is adopted in full for the reasons set forth

therein.

2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. (Rec. Doc. No.

1.)

3. The clerk is directed to close the case file.

 s/ James F. McClure, Jr. 

James F. McClure, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-00717-JFM Document 5 Filed 05/06/05 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1




                                                              Exhibit 23.1

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-98738 and No. 333-39407) pertaining to the Vion
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan and in the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No.333-37941) of Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and
in the related Prospectus of our report dated February 6, 1998, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included in
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

                                                      Ernst & Young LLP

Hartford, Connecticut
March 9,1998
#### Kenneth GAMBLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-943.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 28, 1978.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Beth C. Weitzner, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Linda Collins Hertz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON, J., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

On this appeal from conviction on two counts of robbery, for which the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for ten years and five years, respectively, at hard labor, the appellant challenges provisions of the sentence entered on March 30, 1977 which expressly precluded eligibility for parole for three years [under Section 775.-087(2), Florida Statutes (1975)] and which provided for imprisonment at *hard labor.*In a motion filed by the State, as appellee, it is conceded that on the facts of the case the mandatory three-year sentence provision was not applicable, citing *Earnest v. State,*351 So.2d 957 (Fla.1977); *Johnson v. State,*349 So.2d 1190 (Fla.1977), and that it was incorrect for the sentence to provide for hard labor, citing *Smith v. State,*354 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), Case No. 77-72, opinion filed January 31, 1978; *Wells v. State,*354 So.2d 1221 (Fla.1978). [See also: *Speller v. State,*305 So.2d 231, 232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).]

Accordingly, the sentences thus imposed are hereby amended by striking therefrom the provision excluding eligibility for parole for three years and the provision that the imprisonment shall be at hard labor, as contained therein. The judgment is affirmed, and the sentences as thus amended are affirmed.

It is so ordered.
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER  AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I,
João Manuel de Mello Franco, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Portugal Telecom, SGPS, S.A.;

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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     I
am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have:



5.     I
have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date:
May 15, 2015

By:

/s/ JOÃO MANUEL DE MELLO FRANCOName:

João Manuel de Mello FrancoTitle:

Chairman of the Board of Directors, Principal
Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks