alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.8.2

Ms. Kathleen Fisher
Aptos, Ca.
July 16, 1999

Dear Kathy,

On behalf of Adept  Technology  I am pleased  to offer you a  position  as Chief
Financial Officer and Vice President Finance, reporting to myself. Your biweekly
base  salary  will be  $7,115.38,  and you will be  entitled  to a  monthly  car
allowance of $728, which when combined, is $193,736 on an annual basis. You will
receive a performance review in October 2000.

In addition you will  participate in Adept's  executive  incentive plan which is
based on company  performance as measured by Return on Investment.  The eligible
bonus under this plan ranges from 0 at 12% ROI to 70% at 40% ROI. For our FY2000
we will  guarantee you a 20% bonus.  Your bonus in future years will be based on
the company plan.

We are also  please  to extend to you a loan in the  amount  of  $255,132  at an
initial interest rate of 5.79%  (determined by a federal standard) which will be
forgiven over a period of 10 years. This results in an additional taxable income
to you of $20,000 for each of these 10 years. Adept will grant you an additional
bonus to pay tax and interest  expense.  If you or Adept should  terminate  your
employment  within the first 4 years, the balance of the loan will be due within
180 days.

You will receive the right to obtain  65,000  options for shares of stock at the
fair market value at the time of the next Board of Directors  meeting after your
date of hire.  You will be eligible for  additional  options  after two years of
employment.  The stock  will  vest  over a period of 48 months  from the date of
hire. No vesting occurs for the first 12 months.  At month 13,  12/48ths  become
vested, and each month thereafter options vest linearly at 1/48th per month.

Attached is summary of employee benefits that includes information regarding our
401(k)  match of  $1,000  per year and our  Employee  Stock  Purchase  Plan.  In
addition to the  benefits  described,  you will  accrue  vacation at a rate of 3
weeks per year. Also included is a copy of the Adept Proprietary Agreement. This
offer is contingent on you signing that  agreement.  We are required by the U.S.
government to verify your right to work in the United States.  Please be able to
produce documentation from the attached list.

Kathy,  everyone at Adept who has met you is excited  about working with you and
we hope that you will decide to join our team.  Please  indicate your acceptance
of this offer by  signing  the bottom  portion of this  letter.  This offer will
remain in effect until July 23, 1999.

Sincerely,



/s/ Brian Carlisle
-------------------------------
Brian Carlisle                              ACCEPTED: /s/ Kathleen Fisher
Chairman & CEO                                        --------------------------
                                                      Kathleen Fisher
#### Melton D. BLACKMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-299.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 13, 1971.

Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, Norman J. Kapner and Jeffrey H. Barker, Asst. Public Defenders, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Charles W. Musgrove and Nelson E. Bailey, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On the basis of our review of the briefs, record on appeal and oral argument we are of the opinion that the appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief contains sufficient allegations with respect to an alleged coerced guilty plea to entitle appellant to an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Rule 1.850, F.R.Crim.P., 33 F.S.A. Brumley v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 224 So.2d 447. Appellant’s other contentions are without merit. Accordingly, the order appealed from is re*19versed and the cause remanded to the trial court for the purpose of providing an evi-dentiary hearing solely on the issue of the voluntariness of the guilty plea.

WALDEN, OWEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.
#### Preston CHESTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-424.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 13, 1973.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and Edwin T. Mulock, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PIERCE, Judge (Ret.).

In this case Preston Chester appeals to this Court from a judgment and sentence imposed against him pursuant to a trial and conviction in the Hillsborough County Criminal Court of Record of the offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.

The only point urged upon this appeal is that the trial Court erred in denying Chester the right to present purported alibi testimony. Chester in his brief con-ceeds that he did not comply with CrPR 3.-200, 33 F.S.A. which provides certain restrictions and conditions prerequisite to introduction of such alibi testimony. It is not an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to disallow such testimony upon failure to so comply with the rule. Cox v. State, Fla.App.1969, 219 So.2d 762.

Also the intended alibi testimony was based not on the prospective witness’ personal knowledge but on what Chester had told him. In his brief filed in this Court, Chester seems to vary his attack on the judgment appealed by now contending that failure of his trial counsel to comply with the alibi rule “constitutes State Action and inadequate representation of counsel”. However, the question of inadequate representation is not one that can properly be raised for the first time on a direct appeal from an adverse judgment because it is a matter that has not previously been ruled upon by the trial Court. Such ground within the restricted orbit of “State *77action” must be raised preliminarily during the trial in order to afford a contention upon appeal. An appellate Court may confine itself only to a review of those questions which were before the trial Court and upon which a ruling adverse to the defendant was made. See Yost v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 469; Bertone v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 224 So.2d 400; Haverty v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 258 So.2d 18. See also McPherson v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 237 So.2d 18.

Inasmuch as the sole point raised here for reversal is foreclosed to appellant Chester, the judgment appealed from must be and is—

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<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>                                          16,997
<SECURITIES>                                    18,197
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,811
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (757)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,866
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,670
<PP&E>                                           2,612
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,192)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  43,474
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,236
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        66,596
<OTHER-SE>                                          50
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    43,474
<SALES>                                          5,499
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,499
<CGS>                                            2,779
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,779
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,388
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  25
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (18,247)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (18,247)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (18,247)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.11)
        

</TABLE>
#### Jack A. GRIFFITH, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 40417.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 9, 1970.

Certiorari denied. 239 So.2d 523.

ERVIN, C. J., DREW, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. RUBEN NAVARRETE

- FELIX,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 19

- 50044
D.C. No. 3:18

- cr - 04116

- LAB

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 19, 2019 **
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges

. Ruben Navarrete

- Felix appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24

- month sentence imposed following his guilty

- plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisd iction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

AUG 23 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 19

- 50044

Navarrete

- Felix first contends that the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him in accordance with its blanket policy of imposing longer sentences on repeat illegal reentry offenders. The record shows that the district court denied the fast

- track reduction and imposed an upward variance based on Navarrete

Felix’s particular criminal and immigration history, rather than a blanket policy. Moreover, the above

- Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonab le in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstance s. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 3 8, 51 (2007) . The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Navarrete

- Felix’s sentence. See U nited States v. Rosale s Gonzales , 801 F.3d 1177, 1184

- 85 (9th Cir. 2015).
Navarrete

- Felix also contends that the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 and due process by basing his sentence on unreliable facts and a policy disagreement with the government ’s fast

- track policy

. We review for plain error, see U

nited States v. Vanderwerfhorst , 576 F.3d 929, 934 (9th Cir. 2009) , and conclude that there is none. The record reflects that Navarrete

- F elix was aware of all the facts relevant to the court’s sentencing determination. See United States v. Baldrich , 471 F.3d 1110, 1114 (9th Cir. 2006) (describing the requirements of Rule 32). Moreover, Navarrete

- Felix has not shown that his sentence was d emonstrably based on any false or unreliable information or on the district court’s alleged policy disagreement with the government. See3 19

- 50044

Vanderwerfhorst , 576 F.3d at 935

- 36

. Navarrete

- Felix’s unopposed motion for judicial notice is granted.
AFFIRMED.
Presidential Documents

26197 

Federal Register 

Vol. 83, No. 108 

Tuesday, June 5, 2018 

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 9761 of May 31, 2018 

National Homeownership Month, 2018 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

During National Homeownership Month, we affirm the joy and benefits 

of homeownership. For millions of Americans, owning a home is an important step toward financial security and achieving the American Dream. My 

Administration is committed to fostering an economic environment in which 

every family has the opportunity to enjoy the sense of pride and stability 

that can come with owning a home. 

Our Nation’s economy is experiencing tremendous growth. I signed into 

law historic tax reform that cut taxes for middle class Americans and small 

businesses. My Administration has also slashed unnecessary and burdensome 

regulations that stunted economic growth. As a result of these actions, 

Americans are keeping more of their hard-earned paychecks, unemployment 

rates are at historic lows, and more Americans are entering the workforce. 

Consequently, owning a home is becoming more attainable for many Americans. 

Numerous benefits are associated with homeownership. Owning a home 

gives Americans a place to call their own, and a place of comfort and 

safety where they can raise their families. Homeowners also support local 

businesses, have a strong vested interest in their communities, and foster 

bonds of friendship with others who live and work in their neighborhoods. 

A home is more than a place to live—it is also an investment in family, 

in community, and in the long-term prosperity of our great country. 

This month, we celebrate those Americans whose success and determination 

have helped make them homeowners. Their dedication to their families 

and communities, and to achieving a brighter and more secure future, is 

an inspiration to each person who is pursuing their own American Dream. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2018 as National 

Homeownership Month. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC4
26198 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 5, 2018 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirty-first day 

of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand eighteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12257 

Filed 6–4–18; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 3295–F8–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRESDOC4Trump.EPS</GPH>
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Farmer Bros. Co. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2010,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roger M. Laverty III, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 10, 2010



/s/ Roger M. Laverty IIIRoger M. Laverty IIIPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-19-00236-CV

__________________

GAY ELIZABETH JONES CAPTAIN, Appellant

V.

LEVAIN CAPTAIN, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 133972

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Gay Elizabeth Jones Captain has filed a motion to dismiss her appeal. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 42.2. A request to dismiss the appeal is signed by appellant personally. 

No opinion has issued in this appeal. The motion is granted, and the appeal is 

therefore dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM
2

Submitted on December 18, 2019

Opinion Delivered December 19, 2019

Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 20

- 00309

- CV

Jose “ Joe ” Flores v. Everardo “ Ever ” Villarreal
On Appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. C

- 1121

- 20

- I

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having cons idered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decision certified below fo r ob servance. August 17 , 2020
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7697 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7697

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 110 Johnson Street in Pickens, South Carolina, as the ``Specialist 
                  Four Charles Johnson Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 21, 2020

 Mr. Duncan (for himself, Mr. Norman, Mr. Rice of South Carolina, Mr. 
Timmons, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. Cunningham, and Mr. Clyburn) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 110 Johnson Street in Pickens, South Carolina, as the ``Specialist 
                  Four Charles Johnson Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SPECIALIST FOUR CHARLES JOHNSON POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 110 Johnson Street in Pickens, South Carolina, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Specialist Four Charles Johnson Post 
Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Specialist 
Four Charles Johnson Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
#### C. C. CARPENTER, Jr. v. LEON E. WERNTZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

No. 60117.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 16, 1977.

In re: Leon E. Werntz and Associates, Inc. applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 345 So.2d 1018.

Writ denied. We are unable to say the judgment of the court of appeal is incorrect.

CALOGERO, J., is of the opinion this writ should be granted.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Colin McGREGOR.

No. 61625.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 17, 1978.

In re: State of Louisiana applying for certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. Parish of Caddo.

Writ denied.
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors
Sauer-Danfoss Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements No. 33-53927 and No. 333-93745 on Form S-8 of
Sauer-Danfoss Inc. of our report dated March 4, 2010 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Sauer-Danfoss Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2009 and
2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2009, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which report appears in the
December 31, 2009 annual report on Form 10-K of Sauer-Danfoss Inc.

/s/
KPMG LLP

Des
Moines, Iowa
March 4, 2010

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-165151 on Form S-8 of Colonial Properties Trust of our report dated June ___, 2011, relating to the financial statements and supplemental schedules of the Colonial Properties Trust Amended and Restated 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 11-K of Colonial Properties Trust Amended and Restated 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan for the year ended December 31, 2010.








/s/ Sellers, Richardson, Holman & West, LLP





Birmingham, Alabama
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JUSTIN ROBERT UNDERKOFFLER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 663 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th day of June, 2024

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
March 25, 1999



C. Martin Sowers
Family Dollar Stores, Inc.
P.O. Box 1017
Charlotte, NC 28201-1017

Re:  Credit Agreement dated as of March 31, 1996 among
     NationsBank, N.A. ("NationsBank"), Family Dollar Stores,
     Inc. ("FDSI") and Family Dollar, Inc. ("FDI") (as amended or
     modified prior to the date hereof, the "Credit Agreement")

Dear Marty:

You have requested, on behalf of FDSI and FDI, an extension of
the Tranche A Termination Date for an additional period of one
year in accordance with Section 2.14 of the Credit Agreement. 
NationsBank agrees to such extension and hereby agrees to extend
the "Tranche A Termination Date" from March 31, 2000 to March 31,
2001.  Further, you have requested, on behalf of FDSI and FDI, an
extension of the Tranche B Termination Date for an additional
period of 364 days in accordance with Section 2.15 of the Credit
Agreement.  NationsBank agrees to such extension and hereby
agrees to extend the "Tranche B Termination Date" from March 28,
1999 to March 26, 2000.  Capitalized terms not otherwise defined
herein have the same meaning given to such terms in the Credit
Agreement.

Except as expressly amended by this letter, the Credit Agreement
and all of the other Loan Documents are confirmed and ratified in
all respects and shall remain in full force and effect in
accordance with their respective terms.  FDSI and FDI hereby
affirm that all representations and warranties in the Credit
Agreement remain true and accurate as of the date hereof and that
no Default or Event of Default has occurred and is continuing as
of the date hereof.

This amendment shall be effective upon signing by each of the
parties to the Credit Agreement and the Guarantors.  Please
acknowledge your agreement by signing and returning to me the
enclosed copy of this letter.

Very truly yours,

NATIONSBANK, N.A.



Timothy H. Spanos
Senior Vice President
(704) 386-4507



<PAGE>



ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:
 
FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC.         FAMILY DOLLAR, INC.

By:     C. MARTIN SOWERS           By:     C. MARTIN SOWERS
Name:   C. MARTIN SOWERS           Name:   C. MARTIN SOWERS
Title:  Senior Vice President-     Title:  Senior Vice President-
        Finance                            Finance



Each of the Guarantors below acknowledges and consents to this
Amendment and ratifies its Guaranty:

Family Dollar Services, Inc.       Family Dollar Operations, Inc.

By:     C. MARTIN SOWERS           By:     C. MARTIN SOWERS
Name:   C. MARTIN SOWERS           Name:   C. MARTIN SOWERS
Title:  Senior Vice President-     Title:  Senior Vice President-
        Finance                            Finance


Family Dollar Trucking, Inc.

By:     C. MARTIN SOWERS    
Name:   C. MARTIN SOWERS    
Title:  Senior Vice President-
        Finance