alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Letter Agreement No. 6-1162-ELP-0792



 Exhibit 10.20 

6-1162-ELP-0792 
 United Air Lines, Inc.

 P. O. Box 66100 
 Chicago, IL 60601

  

			
	 Subject:
	  	Alternate Engine Selection
		
	 Reference:
	  	Purchase Agreement No. 3427 (Purchase Agreement) between The Boeing Company (Boeing) and United Air Lines, Inc. (Customer) relating to Model 787-8 aircraft
(Aircraft)

 This letter agreement (Letter Agreement) amends and supplements the Purchase Agreement. All terms used but not
defined in this Letter Agreement have the same meaning as in the Purchase Agreement. 
 Customer has requested and Boeing has agreed that
Customer may delay the selection of engines for the Aircraft beyond the signing date of the Purchase Agreement. The engine model and prices shown in Table 1 to the Purchase Agreement, Supplemental Exhibit EE1 to the Purchase Agreement will be
revised [CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SEC PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT]. The engine price and escalation in effect at the time of engine selection will apply to the engine model
selected. 
 The Model 787-8 Aircraft is offered to Customer powered by [CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SEC
PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT]. Customer shall notify Boeing of Customer’s final engine selection (Default Engine Type) on or before [CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SEC PURSUANT TO A
REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT], and Boeing and Customer shall execute a supplemental agreement to the Purchase Agreement conforming Table 1 to Customer’s engine selection and incorporate an Attachment A to this Letter Agreement
which includes Aircraft delivery, configuration , pricing and advance payments for the Aircraft equipped with [CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SEC PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT].








 Assignment. 

The rights and obligations described in this Letter Agreement are provided to Customer in consideration of Customer becoming the operator of the Aircraft
and can only be assigned, in whole or in part, pursuant to Article 9 of the AGTA as amended by Letter Agreement No. 6-1162-IRS-0184. 







 Confidential Treatment. 

Customer and Boeing understand that certain commercial and financial information contained in this Letter Agreement are considered by Boeing and Customer
as confidential and are subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Letter Agreement No. 6-1162-IRS-0182. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	THE BOEING COMPANY
		
	By	 	 /s/ Nobuko Wiles

		
	Its	 	 Attorney-In-Fact

	
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO this
	
	Date: February 19, 2010
	
	UNITED AIR LINES, INC.


			
		
	By	 	 /s/ Kathryn A. Mikells

		
	Its	 	
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
**CERTIFICATION
      32.1**





**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 Quarterly Report of InterAmerican Acquisition Group Inc.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, William Morro, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.




Date:
                November 14, 2008
            /s/
                William C. MorroWilliam
                MorroChief
                Executive Officer(principal
                executive officer andprincipal
                financial officer)
#### The Jacksonville Street Railroad Company, a corporation under the laws of Florida, Plaintiff in Error, v. R. J. Walton and Margaret E. Walton, his wife, Defendants in Error.

Division A.

Writ of error to Circuit Court, Duval county; Rhydon M. Call, Judge.

Jno. E. Hartridge and J. 'B. Whitfield for plaintiff in error.

Alex. St. Clair-Abrams for defendant in error.

This action was brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error. There was judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendants take writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.

Decision *Per Curiam.*
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 (1.54 MB)

Tags:Air Forces Central Command, 455th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron, U.S. AFCENT, U.S. Air Force, pilot, aircraft, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, Bagram Airfield, Bagram, team, Air Force, Afghanistan, usaf, airmen, vehicle maintenance, aerial port, vehicles, fuels, fuels, contractors, aircrew, Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, supply, contingency operations, passenger terminal, NATO Resolute Support, transportation management

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### J.S.C., Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. J-87-540.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Dec. 2, 1987.

L. Jack Barton, Asst. Dist. Atty., Marietta, for appellant.

*316Kenneth L. Delashaw, Marietta, for ap-pellee.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

J.S.C., a juvenile, was charged with three counts of Avoiding a Road Block in the District Court of Love County Case No. JFJ-86-7. The court after hearing evidence determined J.S.C. should not be certified as an adult. It is from this determination that the State appeals.

Briefly stated the facts of this case are that J.S.C., while allegedly intoxicated, evaded three separate road blocks and was subsequently arrested.

J.S.C. then petitioned the District Court for a certification hearing. J.S.C. underwent three psychological evaluations as a result of the petition for certification. The court reviewed the record and the evaluations and heard testimony about J.S.C.’s ability to be rehabilitated by the juvenile system. The court determined J.S.C. was amenable to rehabilitation within the juvenile system; however, the court ordered him to undergo in-house psychiatric treatment.

In its only assignment of error the State argues that the trial court’s ruling is contrary to the law and evidence presented in the case. We find this argument wholly unpersuasive for two reasons.

First, the State failed to cite any authority in support of its contention. This Court has repeatedly held that we will not search the books for authority to support a defendant’s argument on appeal, and in the absence of relevant authority, we will not consider the argument. *Sullivan v. State,*716 P.2d 684 (Okl.Cr.1986).

Second, 10 O.S.1981, § 1112 clearly states that the determination whether to certify a juvenile as an adult is within the discretion of the trial court. Finding no clear abuse of discretion, this assignment of error is without merit.

For those reasons, the decision of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

BRETT, P.J. and PARKS, J., concur.
FCFS CONSULTING AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 10.1





 


Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT OF PHILLIP ERIC POWELL


 

     This is the Second Amendment ("Second Amendment") to the Consulting Agreement of Phillip Eric Powell originally entered into as of January 1, 2005 (the "Agreement"), by and between First Cash Financial Services, Inc. (the "Company"), a Delaware corporation, and Phillip Eric Powell (the "Consultant").  This Second Amendment shall apply prospectively and is effective as of January 1, 2010.  



     WHEREAS, Consultant is presently serving the Company as an independent contractor pursuant to the Agreement between the parties (said Agreement including all previous amendments and/or addenda, if any), and the parties desire to modify the Agreement as set forth below.


     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations hereinafter set forth, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:



	
1.
	
In paragraph 4 of the Agreement, replace the term "December 31, 2014" with "December 31, 2016."

	 	 
	
2.
	
In paragraph 7(a) of the Agreement, replace the term "$600,000", as amended by the First Amendment, with "$700,000."   In addition, delete the phrase "as a guaranteed minimum amount."

	 	 
	
3.
	
Except as modified herein, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain unchanged.




     CONSULTANT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE HAS BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS SECOND AMENDMENT WITH HIS PRIVATE LEGAL COUNSEL AND HAS AVAILED HIMSELF OF THAT OPPORTUNITY.


	
First Cash Financial Services, Inc.
	 	
Consultant

	 	 	 
	
By:_____________________________ 
	 	
______________________________     

	
     Rick L. Wessel
	 	
Phillip Eric Powell

	
     Chief Executive Officer
#### Ike BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. Patrick McCANN, Director of the Pari-Mutuel Wagering Division of the Department of Business Regulation of the State of Florida, Defendant, Theodore J. Zornow, President of the United States Trotting Association, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 76-1747

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 27, 1976.

*502W. Paul Thompson, Clayton J. M. Adkinson, DeFuniak Springs, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

Harry Lewis Michaels, Tallahassee, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Charles F. Tunnicliff, Tallahassee, Fla., for J. Patrick McCann.

Before AINSWORTH, CLARK and RO-NEY, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5 Cir., *Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al,*5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

ORDER:

The appeal is dismissed for lack of the requisite certification required under Rule 54(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.

The entry of the summary judgment in favor of one of the defendants, but not both, is a judgment which requires a certification under Rule 54(b), Fed.R.Civ.P. Without such a certification, this Court does not have jurisdiction of this appeal. *B. B. Adams General Contractors, Inc. v. Department of Housing and Urban Development,*501 F.2d 176 (5th Cir. 1974); *General Motors Corp. v. Dade Bonded Warehouse, Inc.,*498 F.2d 327 (5th Cir. 1974); *Anderson v. Robinson,*494 F.2d 45 (5th Cir. 1974); *Foret v. McDermott,*484 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1973).

Counsel provided us an appendix with only the order granting the motion for summary judgment, not the judgment itself. We note the docket sheet in the following entry refers to an “Order that this case be dismissed with prejudice and without costs but the court reserves the right to reopen the litigation upon motion of a party.” The wording of this entry negates any thought that the court determined the order to be final.

> In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties.

Rule 54(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.
July 30, 2015

Mr. Jeff Judycki

Perception Imagery Incorporated

1039 Palmer Street

Downers Grove, IL 60516

Dear Mr. Judycki:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

§§ 43.7; 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your request and what you should 

do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We received your May 19, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Perception Imagery 

Incorporated filed into the public docket (No. FAA−2015−1764), but we are unable to process 

your request any further. Your petition does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 

(copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the 

following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-10416 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GEORGE MUNOZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:92-CR-102-A

-------------------- November 27, 2002

Before JONES, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Fe deral Public Defender appointed to represent George

Munoz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as

required by Anders v. California

, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Munoz

received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief and has filed a

response. Munoz submits that counsel’s Anders brief is deficient

because counsel fails to raise a nonfrivolous issue. Munoz argues

that the district court failed to follow 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(5),

which requires the district court to consider “any pertinent policyNo. 02-10416
-2-

statement issued by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

994(a)(2) that is in effect on the date the defendant is

sentenced.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(5). Munoz also moves for the

appointment of counsel. His motion is DENIED.

Our independent review of the brief, the issues raised in

Munoz’s response, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue.

Accordingly, counsel’ s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.
Pickering IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

CARL DEAN EDWARDS, Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent. No. 69965



# FILED
MAYO 320t6

TRACIE K UNDPMAN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT BY__5_ 2 1(

1 DEPUTY CLERK 

### ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is a pro se appeal from a district court order removing rogue documents from the official filings of the district court clerk. Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Kimberly A. Wanker, Judge.

Because no statute or court rule permits an appeal from the aforementioned order, we lack jurisdiction. 

### Castillo v. State, 106 Nev. 349, 352, 792 P.2d 1133, 1135 (1990). Accordingly, we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'

Hardesty

Saitta J.

'In light of this order, we take no action on the pro se motion filed April 13, 2016.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA U0-1323‘ (0) 1947A 

### ecc: Hon. Kimberly A. Wanker, District Judge Christopher R. Arabia Carl Dean Edwards Attorney General/Carson City Nye County District Attorney Nye County Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A ae 2
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.12

                             REDMOND EAST ASSOCIATES

                         10800 NE 8th Street, Suite 1080
                           Bellevue, Washington 98004

                                 (206) 455-2309
                            Facsimile (206) 462-7267


Digital Systems International, Inc.
Attn:  Vice President Finance and Administration
Redmond Science Park
7659 178th Place NE
Redmond, Washington  98052

Re:      Redmond East Business Park

You requested that the windows on the building being constructed by us under our
lease with you dated May 20, 1991, be recessed from the exterior walls of the
building. This would have the effect of reducing the square footage of the
building as calculated under the lease. We are willing to accommodate that
design change in consideration of your agreement that the square footage of the
building will be calculated as if the windows were not recessed. Please evidence
your agreement to the foregoing by signing and returning the enclosed copy of
this letter.

Sincerely,

REDMOND EAST ASSOCIATES


By:        [Illegible]                      
    ---------------------------------
         Partner


Accepted and Agreed to this __________ day of July, 1991.

DIGITAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC.


By:      /s/  Michael Jacobsen      
     -------------------------------
Its:     VP Finance                         
      ------------------------------
EXHIBIT 32.1  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 Quarterly Report of Ameri Metro, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:  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 operation of the Company.  3. 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.  Date: December 17, 2014 By:/s/ Debra Mathias Debra Mathias Chief Executive Officer
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 (1.05 MB)

Tags:SAAPM Proclamation

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery