alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 99.8





VIA FACSIMILE

February 27, 1998

Mr. Richard A. Meckler
Senior Managing Director
LibertyView Capital Management, Inc.
101 Hudson Street, Suite 3700
Jersey City, New Jersey 07302

Re:      6% Secured Convertible Subordinated Debenture Purchase Agreements
         between NetMed, Inc. ("NetMed") and CPR (USA), Inc. ("CPR"),
         LibertyView Fund LLC, and LibertyView Plus Fund (the "Funds").

Dear Rick:

Per our recent discussions, NetMed is prepared to extend to June 30, 1998, the
period during which CPR and the Funds may convert Debentures into the Pledged
Shares under the Debenture Purchase Agreements, provided that CPR and the Funds
agree that conversions into NetMed shares between April 1 and June 30 be at a
discount of 22.5%. To effect this change, the definition of "Conversion Price"
in each of the Debenture Purchase Agreements between NetMed, CPR and the Funds
would be amended to read as follows:

                  "Conversion Price" means an amount equal to the lesser of (a)
         a twenty percent (20%) discount to the average closing bid price as
         reported by the American Stock Exchange, Inc. ("Amex") or such other
         Exchange on which the securities are listed ("Closing Bid Price") for
         the three (3) business days preceding the Conversion Date (for
         conversions taking place between April 1, 1998 and June 30, 1998 the
         discount shall be twenty two and one-half percent (22.5%) to the
         average Closing Bid Price for the three (3) business days preceding the
         Conversion Date, and for conversions taking place after June 30, 1998
         the discount shall be a twenty five percent (25%) to the average
         Closing Bid Price for the three (3) business days preceding the
         Conversion Date); or (b) one hundred ten (110%) percent of the average
         Closing Price for the Common Stock as reported on the Amex during the
         three (3) trading days ending on the day before the Closing Date;
         provided, however, that in the event the Conversion Price for (a) or
         (b) above is less than Three ($3) Dollars per share prior to June 30,
         1998, the Purchaser may either convert into the Company's shares or the
         Pledged Shares, as defined herein, at the


<PAGE>   2
Mr. Richard A. Meckler
March 23, 1998
Page 2

         indicated discount for the Company's shares as per (a) or (b) above, or
         if conversion is into the Pledged Shares, at the discount set forth in
         Section 7(iv) of the Pledge Agreement for the Pledged Shares.

The effective date of this amendment would be March 1, 1998. If the foregoing is
acceptable to CPR and the Funds, please sign and return to me by facsimile at
(614) 793-9356.

Sincerely,

/s/ KENNETH B. LEACHMAN
-----------------------
Kenneth B. Leachman
Vice President - Finance

AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED:

CPR (USA), Inc.
LibertyView Fund, LLC
LibertyView Plus Fund

By: LibertyView Capital Management, Inc.



By: /s/ RICHARD A. MECKLER
   -----------------------
    Richard A. Meckler
    Senior Managing Director
#### Clyde L. MANESS, Appellant, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and Leona Maness, Appellees.

No. 70-703.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 5, 1971.

David Goldman and Jack H. Cohen, Miami, for appellant.

Shutts & Bowen, Simons, Simons & Si-mons, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, *JJ.*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from an order denying appellant’s petition for attorney’s fees pursuant to F.S. § 627.0127(1), F.S.A. The order recites that it is based upon testimony taken before the court. The testimony received was not made a part of the record. Without such a record it is impossible for this court to hold that appellant met the conditions precedent to an award of a fee pursuant to the statute. See Curtiss-Wright Corporation v. King, Fla.App.1968, 207 So.2d 294.

Affirmed.
263 La. 799

#### W. B. STEWART v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 52997.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 5, 1972.

In re: W. B. Stewart applying for remedial writ and writ of habeas corpus.

Application is denied; the sentence is not illegal; the reference to Angola (if in fact there were such reference) is mere surplus-age and R.S. 15:824 places applicant in custody of the La. Dept, of Corrections.

BARHAM, J.,

concurs. The showing here does not warrant a finding of an illegal sentence. However, I am of the opinion that upon a proper showing, a sentence which commits a defendant to a particular state institution rather than to the Louisiana Department of Corrections would be illegal. A sentence must commit to that department under R.S. 15:824. That law should be followed.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 6136
ADRIAN RASHAUN ANDERSON, a/k/a Duke , Defendant

- Appellant ,

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:17

- cr - 00111

- BO

- 2; 5:22

- cv - 00131

- BO )

Submitted : June 15, 2023 Decided: June 21, 2023

Before DIAZ, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Adrian Rashaun Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6136 Doc: 5 Filed: 06/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 32 PER CURIAM: Adrian Rashaun Anderson seeks to appeal th e district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See Whiteside v. United States , 775 F.3d 180, 182

- 83 (4th Cir. 2014) (en banc) (explaining that § 2255 motions are subject to one

- year statute of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a subst antial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When, as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the mo tion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Anderson has not
made the requisite showing. ∗ Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

∗ The district court found that the 90

- day deadline for filing a petition for certiorari expired on August 25, 2020, and therefore determined that Anderson had until August 25, 2021, to timely file his § 2255 motion. In fact, Anderson had until October 25, 2021, to timely file his motion, as the Supreme Court had extended the 90

- day deadline for filing certiorari petitions to 150 days to account for the COVID

- 19 pandemic. Nonetheless, because Anderson filed his § 2255 motion five months after the extended statute of limitations expired, the district court’s dismissal of Anderson’s motion as untimely is not debatable. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6136 Doc: 5 Filed: 06/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 33 are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 23-6136 Doc: 5 Filed: 06/21/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
Alternative Scoring Products

SPRING PRIVACY SERIES

MARCH 19, 2014

Consumer Generated and 

Controlled Health Data

MAY 7, 2014

SPRING PRIVACY SERIES

9:00 am – 10:00 am Registration/Doors Open

10:00 am – 10:05 am Welcome

10:05 am – 10:20 am Overview of Predictive Analytics Presentation

Claudia Perlich

Chief Scientist, Dstillery

10:20 am - 11:00 am Panel Discussion

Moderator

Katherine Armstrong & Andrea Arias

Attorneys, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, F

Panelis

Pamela Dixon 

Founder, World Privacy Forum

Edmund Mierzwinski

Consumer Program Director and Senior Fellow, 

U.S. Public Interest Research Grou

Claudia Perlich 

Chief Scientist, Dstillery

Stuart Pratt

President and CEO, Consumer Data Industry Associat

Ashkan Soltani

Independent Researcher and Consultan

Rachel Nyswander Thomas

Executive Director of the Data-Driven Marketing Institute and

Vice President of Government Affairs, Direct Marketing Associati

Joseph Turow

Professor, Annenberg School for Communication at the

University of Pennsylvania

11:00 am – 11:15 am Emerging Trends in Online Pricing Presentation

Ashkan Soltani

Independent Researcher and Consultan

11:15 am – 12:00 pm Panel Discussion
#### Joseph F. TUOZZO, Appellant, v. NAUTICAL YACHT BASIN, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 71-32.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 16, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 25, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Andrew BROWN v. W. C. DRENNAN et al.

No. 8778.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

Dec. 13, 1977.

On Rehearing Jan. 11, 1978.

*964See also, La.App., 359 So.2d 715.

William A. Summers, III, Metairie, for plaintiff-appellant.

Montgomery, Barnett, Brown & Read, Charles A. Boggs, New Orleans, for interve-nor-appellant.

Hammett, Leake, Hammett, Hulse & Nelson, Robert E. Leake, Jr., New Orleans, for defendants-appellees.

Before LEMMON, SCHOTT and BEER, JJ.

SCHOTT, Judge.

We previously denied a motion filed by appellee to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, 347 So.2d 955. That opinion was specifically overruled by the court en banc in *Martin v. Parish of Jefferson,*La. App., 351 So.2d 1316 (1977, No. 8717 on our docket). We therefore have reconsidered whether or not we have jurisdiction over this appeal, and under the rationale of this court in the *Martin*case we have concluded that we have none.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We have granted the application for rehearing filed by United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, intervenor, and applicant in order to clarify our judgment of December 13, 1977.

As can be seen by reference to our earlier opinion at 347 So.2d 955, the intervenor perfected a timely appeal, so that it was not our intention to dismiss its appeal but only the appeal attempted to be taken by plaintiff.

Accordingly, the appeal of the intervenor, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company is properly within the jurisdiction of this court and is hereby maintained, and our judgment of December 13, dismissing the appeal, is restricted to the appeal taken by plaintiff-appellant.

REHEARING GRANTED, APPEAL OF INTERVENOR MAINTAINED.
| **333-133189**           | **20-4531310**                    |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| (Commission File Number) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) |

| |_| | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| |_| | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| |_| | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| |_| | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR240.13e-4(c)) |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

|                  |    | **MILLENNIUM INDIA ACQUISITION COMPANY INC.**  /s/ F. Jacob Cherian |
|-----------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: August 16, 2010 |    | F. Jacob CherianChairman and Chief Executive Officer                          |
#### Marjorie RENDULIC, Appellant, v. George RENDULIC, Appellee.

No. 70-795.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 24, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Roger A. Barker, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee-Appellant, v. ODELL VINSON OIL FIELD CONTRACTORS, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants-Appellees.

No. 3044.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

April 23, 1970.

Holt & Woodley, by E. E. Woodley, Lake Charles, for defendants-appellants.

Planché, Sanders & Smith, by Reid K. Hebert, Lake Charles, for plaintiff-appellee.

Stockwell, St. Dizier, Sievert & Vic-cellio, by Robert W. Thomas, Lake Charles, for defendants-appellees.

Before TATE, SAVOY and HOOD, JJ.

SAVOY, Judge.

This is a companion case to Freddie Gloston v. Milchem, Inc. et al., 234 So.2d 534 (La.App. 3 Cir.1970), decided this date. See that case for a discussion of the facts and issues of this case.

For the reasons assigned in the companion case, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. The costs of appeal are assessed one-half against plaintiff, and one-half against the defendants, Odell Vinson Oil Field Contractors, Inc., and Travelers Insurance Company.

Affirmed.
#### Dahlia BARROSO, a minor, by her next friend and father, Emanuel Barroso, and Emanuel Barroso, individually, Appellants, v. Joseph Edward ROSSI and Allstate Insurance Company, a corporation, Appellees.

No. 70-798.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 11, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7675 

To modify and extend the update of the Department of Defense Freedom 

of Navigation Report. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 20, 2020 

Mr. BRINDISI (for himself, Mr. BYRNE, Mr. BALDERSON, and Mr. WALTZ) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Armed Services 

A BILL 

To modify and extend the update of the Department of 

Defense Freedom of Navigation Report. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘South China Sea Free5 dom of Navigation Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF UPDATE OF DE7 PARTMENT OF DEFENSE FREEDOM OF NAVI8 GATION REPORT. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 1275 of 

10 the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7675 IH

1 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 130 Stat. 2540) is amend2 ed— 

3 (1) by striking ‘‘an annual basis’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘a biannual basis’’; and 

5 (2) by striking ‘‘the previous year’’ and insert6 ing ‘‘the previous 6 months’’. 

7 (b) ELEMENTS.—Subsection (b) of such section is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by 

10 striking ‘‘the year’’ and inserting ‘‘the period’’; 

11 (2) in paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘the number 

12 of maritime and overflight challenges to each such 

13 claim and’’ before ‘‘the country’’; 

14 (3) in paragraph (5), by inserting ‘‘have been 

15 protested by the United States but’’ before ‘‘have 

16 not been challenged’’; and 

17 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

18 ‘‘(6) A summary of each excessive maritime 

19 claim challenged jointly with international partners 

20 and allies.’’. 

21 (c) FORM.—Subsection (c) of such section is amend22 ed by adding at the end before the period the following: 

23 ‘‘and made publicly available’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7675 IH

1 (d) SUNSET.—Subsection (d) of such section is 

2 amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2021’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘December 31, 2025’’. 

4 (e) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The heading of 

5 such section is amended by striking ‘‘ANNUAL’’ and in6 serting ‘‘BIANNUAL’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 23.01

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our reports dated January 13, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control
over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Versant Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of said reports in the previously filed Registration Statements of Versant Corporation on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-08537, effective July 19,
1996, 333-29947, effective June 24, 1997, 333-80827, effective June 16, 1999, 333-43480, effective August 10, 2000, 333-58152,
effective April 2, 2001, 333-67776, effective August 17, 2001, 333-87922, effective May 9, 2002, 333-107956, effective August 14, 2003,
333-113871, effective March 24, 2004, 333-125368, effective May 31, 2005, 333-130601, effective December 22, 2005, 333-143278,
effective May 25, 2007, and 333-152550, effective July 25, 2008).

|                                           |  | 
|------------------------------------------ |  | 
|/s/ Grant Thornton LLP                     |  | 
|San Francisco, California
January 13, 2009 |  | 

---



QuickLinks
UNITED STATES

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                             _______________________

                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT
                             _______________________

                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE
                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):

                               December 2, 2011

                       Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

                                      Ohio
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)

             000-24498                              65-0190407
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      (Commission File Number)         (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

      325 John H. McConnell Blvd, Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio         43215
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      (Address of Principal Executive Offices)                    (Zip Code)

Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:   (614) 255-3333

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)

<PAGE>

Item 8.01.    Other Events
----------   --------------------------------------------

     The following is a summary of assets under management as of November 30,
2011 (in millions):


	By Investment Vehicle
	---------------------

Separate Accounts	 	$  3,275
Mutual Funds 			   4,081
Sub-Advised Mutual Funds	     978
Private Investment Funds	     167
                                --------
Total			       	$  8,501

	By Investment Strategy
	----------------------
Small Cap			$    919
Small-Mid Cap		             277
Select				     324
Large Cap 			   4,737
Long-Short		           2,075
Strategic Income		     169
				--------
Total			        $  8,501

                                    SIGNATURE
                                    ---------


     Pursuant to the  requirements  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed  on its  behalf
by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                        DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.


Date: December 2, 2011	                    By: /s/ James F. Laird
                                            -------------------------------
                                            James F. Laird, Chief Financial
                                            Officer and Secretary
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 28003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12837]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the joint 
meeting of the National Cancer Advisory Board and NCI Board of 
Scientific Advisors, June 26, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to June 27, 2018, 12:00 
p.m., National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 
Conference Room TE 406/408, Rockville, MD 20850 which was published in 
the Federal Register on June 05, 2018, 83 FR 26069.
    This meeting notice is being amended to update the meeting 
locations for the National Cancer Advisory Board Ad Hoc Subcommittee 
meetings. The National Cancer Advisory Board Ad Hoc Subcommittee 
Population Science, Epidemiology and Disparities meeting on June 25, 
2018, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., will be held at the Gaithersburg Marriott 
Washingtonian Center in Salons A and B. The National Cancer Advisory 
Board Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Global Cancer Research meeting on June 25, 
2018, 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., will be held at the Gaithersburg Marriott 
Washingtonian Center in Salon C.

    Dated: June 11, 2018.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-12837 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RICKY ROUSE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 418 WAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

and Motion to File an Amended Petition for Allowance of Appeal or a Motion to Remand 

are DENIED.