alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
August
28, 2014


 


Bone
Biologics, Inc.


175
May Street, Suite 400


Edison,
NJ 08837








	 	Attn:	Bruce Stroever, Chairman
	 	 	Michael Schuler, CEO
	 	 	William Jay Treat, President









 


Musculoskeletal
Transplant Foundation


125
May Street


Edison,
NJ 08837





	 	Attn:	Bruce Stroever, President, CEO



 





Dear
Mr. Stroever and Mr. Schuler:


 


Reference
is made to the Amended and Restated Letter of Intent, dated as of May 7, 2014 (the “LOI”), by and among AFH
Holding and Advisory, LLC, Bone Biologics, Inc., and the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation. This letter shall constitute the
parties’ agreement that:


 


1. Amendment.


 


(a) The
first sentence of the section titled “Termination” (beginning with “After the execution” and ending
with “to May 30, 2014”) is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following sentence:


 


“After
the execution of this LOI by the parties, this LOI may be terminated: (i) upon the mutual written agreement of AFH Advisory and
the Company, (ii) by AFH Advisory as a result of the material breach by the Company of the binding provisions of this LOI, (iii)
by the Company as a result of the material breach by AFH Advisory of the binding provisions of this LOI, (iv) by either party
as a direct result of a material finding from due diligence, in such party’s reasonable discretion, which must be exercised
within the next ninety (90) days but in no event later than the execution of the agreement setting forth the material terms of
the Business Combination (whichever occurs first) after such time this subparagraph (iv) will expire or (v) by either AFH Advisory
or the Company in the event Closing II has not occurred prior to September 30, 2014.


 


  







    	 



    	 	 	 



    

 












 


Binding
Effect. Except as amended hereby, the terms and provisions set forth in the LOI shall remain in full force and effect
and, to the extent applicable under the terms of the LOI, be binding on the parties thereto.


 


2. Counterparts.
This letter may be signed in counterparts (including by facsimile or electronic mail transmission), any one of which need not
contain the signature of more than one party, but all such counterparts taken together will constitute one and the same agreement.


 


Sincerely,


 










	 	AFH
    HOLDING AND ADVISORY, LLC
	 	 
	 	By:	
	 	Name:	Amir F. Heshmatpour
	 	Title:	Managing Director
	 	DATED:	







 


ACKNOWLEDGED
AND AGREED:


 





	BONE
                                         BIOLOGICS, INC. 





	 	MUSCULOSKELETAL
                                         TRANSPLANT FOUNDATION 






	 	 	 
	By:	

        
	 	By:
    	

        

	Name:	William
                                         Jay Treat

        
	 	Name:	Michael
                                         J. Kawas

        

	Title:	President

        
	 	Title:	Executive
                                         Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

        

	DATED:	


        
	 	DATED:	






  














 






    	Page 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5




<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000

<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000

<CASH>                                         211,125
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  20,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               245,468
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,274,445
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          55,643
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       20,963,315
<OTHER-SE>                                     (12,744,513)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,218,802
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               66,018
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               993,726
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (927,708)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (927,708)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (927,708)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.05)



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 16 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.16
                                          Agreed to May 21, 2013        

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR THE UNVEILING OF FREDERICK 
              DOUGLASS STATUE.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used for an event on June 19, 2013, to unveil a 
statue of Frederick Douglass.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.53 MB)

Tags:Betsy Ross House, Clothing and Textiles, Flag ladies, DLA Troop Support

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
# jf**oiirtlj Court** **of SS** **Antonio, Ci\\as'** **October 1.2013** **No.()4-12-00781-CR Douglas** **Anthony Wilkens.** 

### Appellant**V.**

### The**State of** **Texas,**

### Appellee**Trial Court** **Case No.** **201ICR9131**

## ()**R D E R** **The Court** **has reviewed** **the record** **and briefs** **in this** **appeal and** **the majority** **of the** **judges have** **determined that oral** **argument will** **mil significantly** **aid it** **in determining** **the legal** **and**

### Tactual**issues presented** **in the** **appeal. See** **Tex. R.** **App. P.** **39.S. Therefore,** **all requests** **for oral** **argument are** **denied, and** **the cause** **is advanced** **for ON** **BRIEFS submission** **on November** **12. 2013.** **to the** **following panel:** **Justice Marion.** **Justice Marline/,** **and Justice** **Chapa. All** **parlies**

### will**be notified** **of the** **Court's decision** **in this appeal** **in accordance** **with ex.** **R. Ait.** **P. 48.** **Either parly** **may file** **motion requesting** **the Court** **to reconsider** **its determination** **that oral** **argument will** **not significantly** **aid the** **Court in** **determining the** **legal and** **factual issues** **presented in** **the appeal.** **See TEX.** **R. APP.** **P. 39.S.** **Such motion** **should he** **filed within** **ten (10)** 

### days from**the date** **of this** **order. It** **is so** **ORDERED on** **October 1.** **2013. Sandee** **Bryan Marion,** **Justice**

### IN**WITNESS WHEREOF,** **have hereunto** **set my** **hand and** **affixed the** **seal of** **the said** **court on** **this October** **1. 2013.** 

## •^X^..--—"■"--.'V**go/ s>**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          90,357                 101,678
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,494                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,035,001               1,876,335
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              487                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,034,514               1,876,335
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,035,001               1,876,335
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,853                  56,995
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,734                  18,519
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (41,881)                  38,476
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,881)                  38,476
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

EL PASO COUNTY WATER 

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1,

 Appellant,

v.

COMANCHE TRAIL PIPELINE, LLC,

 Appellee. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00231-CV

Appeal from

County Court at Law No. 6

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2016DCV0255)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed, in accordance with the opinion of this Court. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We 

further order Appellant to pay all costs of this appeal. We further order that this decision be 

certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
#### Sheldon Anekstein, Plaintiff, *v.*Myron J. Smith, Defendant.

Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Bronx,

November 28, 1958.

*441
      *Murray Bogatin*for plaintiff.

*George H. Rosen*for defendant.

Arthur Wachtel, J.

Upon the foregoing papers this motion is denied. The alleged contract provided that the “ exclusive right to sell or to contract to sell ” the property was given to plaintiff, and that he was to be paid certain commissions £ *‘*at the rate of 10% on the land and 5% on the building of the total purchase price ” — ££ upon any sale or contract for sale of said real estate ” —££ whether such sale be made by yourself, by myself, by ourselves or any other person, firm or corporation, or whether at the price and upon the terms stated herein, or at a different price or upon other terms, provided such price or other terms shall first be accepted by me ”. These terms are typewritten on plaintiff’s letterhead. Written in longhand are the following insertions: ££ The owner shall have the right to sell the above property to Bob Mastro of Monticello, N. Y. In such event, the owner agrees to pay the broker $400. commission. If the owner himself shall sell, the commission shall be $500.”

Plaintiff contends that defendant entered into a contract to sell the property to one Aaron Bring for $9,000 and even though this contract was not consummated, is entitled to commissions of $712.50 on the basis of the amount of said contract. If plaintiff’s argument were to prevail, then defendant would be liable for $712.50 on the basis of contract to sell; yet he would only be liable for $500 if he should ££ sell ”. The defendant alleges in his bill of particulars that plaintiff represented to him prior to the execution of the contract ££ that unless there was an actual closing of title and the receipt of consideration thereof by the defendant for the sale of his property, that plaintiff would make no demand for any commissions whatever ”, There was at least an ambiguity in respect of the words ££ sale or contract for sale ”,££ sale ”, and ££ sell and whether the contract was in fact intended to give plaintiff the right to commissions in the event of a contract to sell only, executed by the owner. Parol evidence is admissible in this respect. (Cf. *O'Connor-Sullivan*v. *Otto,*283 App. Div. 269, motion for leave to appeal denied 283 App. Div. 762.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

WILLIAM KEITH KNOX, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-50079 

D.C. No. 8:13-cr-00220-CJC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 18, 2017**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

William Keith Knox appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 63-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 

wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. We have jurisdiction 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

DEC 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-50079 

Knox contends that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary. He 

asserts that his questions and statements during the change-of-plea hearing reflect 

that he did not understand the plea. He further contends that the court failed to 

remedy his confusion and confirm that he was pleading guilty voluntarily, as 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 requires. We review the voluntariness of a 

plea de novo, and an unpreserved Rule 11 claim for plain error. See United States 

v. Carter, 795 F.3d 947, 950 (9th Cir. 2015).

Contrary to Knox’s argument, the record reflects that the court thoroughly 

reviewed all aspects of Knox’s plea with him, gave him multiple opportunities to 

speak privately with his attorney, and adequately addressed his questions and 

requests for clarification. The totality of the circumstances show that his plea was 

knowing and voluntary. See United States v. Kaczynski, 239 F.3d 1108, 1114 (9th 

Cir. 2001). Moreover, there was no plain Rule 11 error; the district court twice 

confirmed that Knox was pleading guilty voluntarily and the record does not 

reflect that Knox would have pled differently had the court inquired further. See

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(2); United States v. Escamilla-Rojas, 640 F.3d 1055, 1061-

62 (9th Cir. 2011).

AFFIRMED.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 19, 2022

No. 04

- 22

- 00192

- CR

IN RE ROAUL ENRIQUE DAVILA

Original Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C . Martinez, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. C hapa, Justi ce

Irene Rios, Justice

On April 6, 2022, Relator filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus and a motion

for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus. After considering the petition and the record,

this court concludes Relator did not show he is entitled to the relief sou ght. Accordingly, the

petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(a). Relator’s motion for

leave is DENIED as moot.

It is so ORDERED on April 19, 2022.

PER CURIAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2017CR000974D1, styled The State of Texas v. Roaul Enrique Davila

, pending in the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas, the Honorable Jose A. Lopez presiding

.

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002






In
connection with the Annual Report of PLX Technology, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Arthur O. Whipple,Chief Financial
Officerof the
Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18,
Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:




1.
            the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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
      at the dates and for the periods
indicated.




This
Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.


Date:
March 5, 2009





By:
            
            /s/ Arthur O.
      Whipple
              Arthur
      O. Whipple
              Chief
      Financial
Officer
Exhibit


Exhibit 10.1a




AMENDMENT 
TO THE
2014 BANKUNITED, N.A. 
NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


    
This is an Amendment to the 2014 BankUnited, N.A. Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan (the “2014 Plan”) (the “Amendment”).  All capitalized terms not defined herein have the meaning ascribed to them in the Plan.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of BankUnited, Inc. (the “Board”), through its Compensation Committee, is authorized to amend the Plan in accordance with Section 14 of the Plan; and 
WHEREAS, the Board wishes to amend the Plan to clarify the formula for Company Contributions and provide participants with an opportunity to make annual elections with respect to distributions of future deferrals upon a Change in Control. 
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 14 of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended, in each case, effective as of the dates specified:
1.Effective as of January 1, 2014, Section 6.1(b) is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:
“(b)    Notwithstanding the preceding, with respect to a Group A Eligible Employee Participant, Company Contributions shall be credited for each Plan Year in an amount equal to the sum of (i) 100% of the portion of the Participant’s Eligible Compensation deferred that does not exceed 1% of his or her Eligible Compensation, plus (ii) 70% of the portion of the Participant’s Eligible Compensation deferred that exceeds 1% of the Participant’s Eligible Compensation but does not exceed 6% of the Participant’s Eligible Compensation.  Such Company Contributions shall be credited to the Participant’s Account as soon as practicable after the end of the applicable pay period.”
2.Effective as of December 1, 2014, Section 9.3 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:
“9.3.    Change in Control.  In the event of a Change in Control, distribution of a Participant’s vested Account for a Plan Year shall be made in a lump sum within 60 days of the Change in Control if:
(a)    with respect to deferrals of Eligible Compensation earned for services rendered on or before December 31, 2014, the Participant selected such distribution option in his or her initial Election Notice; or

1    


Exhibit 10.1a




(b)    with respect to deferrals of Eligible Compensation earned for services rendered on or after January 1, 2015, the Participant selected such distribution option in his or her Election Notice for the Plan Year in which services relating to such Eligible Compensation are rendered.”
3.Terms used herein without definitions shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Plan.    
4.Except as expressly modified in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, BankUnited has caused this Amendment to the 2014 BankUnited, N.A. Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan to be executed by its duly authorized officer on this 1st day of December, 2014.


BANKUNITED, N.A.




By:                        


Title:                        





2