alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT TO
                            WARRANT CERTIFICATE


THIS AMENDMENT (the "Amendment") to the Warrant Certificate dated as of
January 18, 2000 (the "Warrant Certificate"), issued by RAMTRON
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION (the "Employer") to DAVID SIKES (the "Executive"),
is dated and made effective as of December 14, 2000.

                                 WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, vesting of the warrants granted to the Executive pursuant to the
Warrant Certificate requires the occurrence of certain events prior to
December 31, 2001, or Executive to be employed by the Company on
December 31, 2002; and

WHEREAS, the Executive's employment agreement has been amended to extend the
term of the Executive's employment through December 31, 2002, and to modify
the terms of vesting of Executive's warrants;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the Employer hereby amends
the Warrant Certificate as follows:

1.  Definitions

Unless otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein shall
have the respective meanings set forth in the Warrant Certificate.

2.  Amendments

    (a)  Section 1(e) of the Warrant Certificate is amended by entirely
         deleting the proviso and replacing the semicolon after "vesting"
         with a period.

    (b) (i) The date "December 31, 2001" in each place that it appears in
            Section 2(a) of the Warrant Certificate is amended to read
            "December 31, 2002"; and the portion of the first sentence of
            Section 2(a) of the Warrant preceding the proviso is deleted and
            replaced with the following:  "The Warrants shall vest and
            become exercisable at the opening of business on December 31,
            2002, if Executive is employed by Employer on that date or on
            the date of any earlier termination of Executive's employment
            for any reason (including death) other than for "just cause;".

    (c)  Section 2(b)(ii) of the Warrant Certificate is hereby removed from
         the Warrant Certificate in its entirety.

                                    Page-1
<PAGE>
3.  Effect of Amendments

Except as expressly modified by the provisions of this Amendment, the
Warrant Certificate and all of the terms, provisions and conditions thereof
shall for all purposes remain unchanged, and in full force and effect, and
are approved, ratified and confirmed, and from and after the date hereof all
references to the Warrant Certificate in any other agreement, instrument or
document shall mean the Warrant Certificate as amended hereby.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed and delivered by
the Employer as of the day and year first above written.

RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION         ACCEPTED AND AGREED:

/S/ LuAnn D. Hanson                       /S. L. David Sikes
By ------------------------------         -------------------------
Name:  LuAnn D. Hanson                    L. David Sikes
Title:  Chief Financial Officer and
        Vice President of Finance

                                    Page-2
<PAGE>
1
SCWC-18

- 0000 583

________________________________________________________________ NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, Respondent/Plaintiff- Appell ee ,
vs. JAMES BOONSTRA, Petitioner/Defendant- Appell ant and ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF THE VINTAGE AT KAANAPALI; KAANAPALI GOLF ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC.; FIRST HAWAIIAN BANK; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE TO JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWABS MASTER TRUST, REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN ASSET BACKED NOTES, SERIES 2004- Q,

Respondents/Defendants- Appellees.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP

- 1 8

- 0000583 ; CIVIL NO. 15

- 1- 0093(2) ) ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Petitioner/Defendant- Appellant James Boonstra ’s application for writ of certiorari filed on September 9 , 2019, is hereby rejected. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai  i, November 5 , 2019. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI  I SC WC-18-0000583 05- NOV-2019 12:18 PM
August 16, 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO: EPA Docket #

FROM: Cheryl Caffrey, Mechanical Engineer, ASD, EPA

RE: Oregon.gov list of non-ethanol blend fuel suppliers

____________________________________________________________________________

http: The Oregon state government has published a list of non-ethanol fuel suppliers and it can 

be found at the following website:

http://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdf//www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/

EthanolList.pdfhttp://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfhttp://www.

The following list is a sampling of the information provided to consumers.

ews/docs/EthanolLihttp://www.oregoAugustn.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfhttp:/

/www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfLocation County Distributor / Retailer

Black Distributing Inc. Baker Distributor non-blended

2150 Broadway

Baker City, OR 97814

541.523.4575

Stage Stop Baker Retailer non-blended/diesel

120 Sumpter Hwy

Sumpter, OR 97877

541.894.2304

Triangle Farm Supply Inc. Baker Wholesaler / Distributor

2500 Cedar St.

Baker City, OR 97814

541.523.3336

Fischer Mill Supply Inc. Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor

20990 S. Fischer Mill Rd.

Oregon City, OR 97045

503-631-3411

Wilco Farm Stores Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor

19224 S. Molalla Ave. Non-blended premium

Oregon City, OR 97045 *sells packaged 5 gal. containers

503-656-0616

Wilco Farm Stores Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor

195 East Hazeldell Way Non-blended premium

Canby, OR 97013 *sells packaged 5 gal. containers

503.266.2213
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION for the year ended December 31, 2005, I, Eric A. Balzer, Chief
Financial Officer of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

    (1)  such Annual Report on Form 10-K of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
         CORPORATION for the year December 31, 2005, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K of
         RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for the year ended December 31,
         2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
         condition and results of operations of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
         CORPORATION.


/s/ Eric A. Balzer
-------------------
Eric A. Balzer
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer and
Duly Authorized Officer of the
Registrant)

March 14, 2006

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

                                    Page-1
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 23.1


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



     As independent public  accountants,  we hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration  Statements on Forms S-4(File No. 333-52501,
No.  333-59265, and No. 333-60727) and Forms S-8 (File No. 33-42354,
No. 33-63510, No.33-79654,  No. 33-79756,  No. 33-79664,  No. 333-48357,
 No. 333-62473, No. 333-68815 and No. 333-81821) of our reports dated March 3,
1999  included in the Allied Waste  Industries, Inc. Form 10-K/A-1 for the year
ended December 31, 1998.


                                                          ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Phoenix, Arizona,
 July 12, 1999.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

| (1)   | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2)   | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                                              |                                     |
|-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                               |                                         |                                |
| Date: August              15, 2005 | By:                                     | /s/ Robert              L. Ferguson |
| Name:                         | Robert              L. Ferguson                   |
|  Title:                       | Chairman              and Chief Executive Officer |
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Jeffrey Kornblum, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Odimo Incorporated;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: May 15, 2006 /s/ Jeffrey Kornblum   Jeffrey Kornblum   President and Chief Executive Officer
BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN

T OF TRANSPORTATIO

N WASHINGTON , DOC . Agreement s Adopte dby the Traffi c _ ^ Conference s of

th e Internationa

l Docke t OST - ^^// - ^ ^ ^ ^ Ai r Transpor t Associatio n

APPLICATIO N FO RAPPROVA L O F AGREEMENT S

B Y TH E INTERNATIONA L AI RTRANSPOR T ASSOCIATIO N lAT A AGREEMEN T APPROVE D & IMMUNIZE D DOCKE T OST- Z^t ^ • CO ^ f. . ACTIO N DAT E Jl-e^ ^ n " ^ ' ^ Thi s approva l an dgran t

o f antitrus t immunity i s subject , wher e apph'cable , t o condition s previousl y imposed . Thi s actio n i s effectiv e alte r 7 day s unles s apetitio n i s file dunde r 1 4 CF R385.3 0 o r

arevie w i s undertake n o n th e Department' s ow n motion . I n vie w o f thsjgreement' s noncontrovcrsia l natur e an dthe - availability o f th e abov&{lfodbditre , the^-^ y i^^e^nAA^F R3U3.4 2 i s waived .

20 Apri l 201 1 Communication s wit

h respec t t o thi s documen

t shoul d b e sen

t to : 

## I Dougla s Lavin | : Regiona l Vic e President

- Nort h Americ a| Internationa

l Ai r Transpor t Associatio n 177 6 K St . N.W . #12 * Floor Washington , D.C . 2000 6 (202)293-929 2
SM Energy



# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 1, 2013

N o. 04

- 12

- 00772

- CV

W.H. SUTTON, Arctic Royalty Limited Partnership, Julie S. Mueller, Janet Lee Sm ith as

Trustee of the Janet Lee Smith Family Trust, Anita Louise Davies as Trustee of the Anita Louise

Davies Family Trust and Frederick Jackson Bell Jr., et al.

,

Appellants

v.

SM ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellee

From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CVQ001903 D3

Honorable Elma T. Salinas Ender, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant's Second Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief is

hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Marialy n Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 1st day of August, 2013

.

___________________________________ Keith E . Hottle

Clerk of Court
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT ALEJANDR O R OJAS JIM ENEZ,

Pe t i tione r,
v. M ERR IC K B
. GARLAND, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 21-1284 Age n c y No. A216-434-326
M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d

M ay 10, 2023 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : S.R . THOM AS, C HR ISTEN, a nd B R E SS, C irc uit Judge s. Ale ja ndro R oja s Jim e ne z , a

native and c itiz e n

of M e xic o, pe titions for
re vie w of a

B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls (“ B IA” ) de c ision dism issing his a

ppe a l from an Im m igration Judge(“ IJ” )’ s de c ision tha t de c line d to te rm inat e re m ova l proc e e dings. W e have jurisdic tion pursua nt to 8 U.S.C
. § 1252. W he re , a s he re , 

# F IL ED MAY12 2023 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).the B IA issue s its own opinion, this C o urt re vie ws “ only the B IA’ s de c ision,
e xc e pt to thee xte nt tha

t it e xp re ssly

a dopts theIJ’ s opinion.” Flore s-Lope z v . Holde r , 685 F.3d 857, 861 (9th C ir. 2012). B e c a use the pa rtie s are fa m ilia

r with the fa c tua l a

nd proc e dura l history

of the c a se , we ne e d not re c ount it he re . W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w . The B IA’ s sole ba sis for dismissing Roja s Jim e ne z ’ s a ppe a l wa s tha

t he
c onc e de d re m ova

bility through his c ounse l. R oja s Jim e ne z doe s not c onte st this in his pe tition for re vie w or c onte nd tha t the B IA wa s inc orre c t in its holding. Ac c ordingly , he ha s wa ive d a ny argum e nt c h a lle n g ing the B IA’ s de c ision. Se e Esc obar Santos v . Garland , 4 F.4th 762, 764 n.1 (9th C ir. 2021) (a rgum e nts not
ra ise d in pe titione r’ s ope ning brie f are wa ive d). PE T IT IO N DE NIE D.

2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1307

GARY JONES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

P. KIM, Assistant States Attorney; GREGORY FISCHER, Assistant Public 

Defender; LISA FISCHELMAN, Assistant Bar Counsel; LYDIA LAWLESS, Bar 

Counsel; JUDIT OTVOS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

Matthew James Maddox, District Judge. (1:23-cv-03506-MJM)

Submitted: July 25, 2024 Decided: July 30, 2024

Before GREGORY, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Jones, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1307 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Gary Jones appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Jones v. Kim, No. 1:23-

cv-03506-MJM (D. Md. Mar. 8, 2024). We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1307 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      10,748,250
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  436,839
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    839,821
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,077,690
<PP&E>                                       1,623,666
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,145,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,890,015
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,192,911
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,291,599
<COMMON>                                         4,900
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,900,605
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,890,015
<SALES>                                      2,012,205
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,945,570
<CGS>                                        1,281,353
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,214,718
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,955,648
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,089,714)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,089,714)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,089,714)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

</TABLE>
#### Galen E. LOKEY v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, et al.

Civ. 6183.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

April 20, 1988.

Rehearing Denied May 25, 1988.

Galen E. Lokey, pro se.

George Cocoris, Gen. Counsel, and Glenn Chaffin, Asst. Gen. Counsel, State of Ala. Dept, of Industrial Relations, Montgomery, for appellee.

SCRUGGS, Retired Circuit Judge.

In this unemployment compensation case, the employee has appealed from an adverse final judgment of the trial court which was rendered after an ore tenus trial.

The employee contends that there is no dispute in the evidence. On the other hand, the Department of Industrial Relations contends that the evidence conflicted. The record does not contain a transcript of the evidence. When the evidence which was presented to the trial court is not before an appellate court, it must be conclusively presumed by the appellate court that the missing evidence is sufficient to support the final judgment, and that judgment will be affirmed. *Seidler v. Phillips,*496 So.2d 714 (Ala.1986); *Simmons v. Simmons,*516 So.2d 1389 (Ala.Civ.App.1987).

Even if a transcript of all of the evidence were before us, the judgment would still be affirmed since the employee did not cite in his brief any authority to support his argument as is required by Rule 28(a)(1) and (5) of the Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure. It is neither our duty nor our function to do all of the legal research for an appellant and, where an appellant fails to cite any authority, we may affirm. *Henderson v. Alabama A & M University,*483 So.2d 392 (Ala.1986).

The final judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Circuit Judge Edward N. Scruggs while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of section 12-18-10(e), Code 1975, and this *1327opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 2573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-766]



[[Page 2573]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


International Product Change--Global Plus 1C and 2C Negotiated 
Service Agreements

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service hereby gives notice of its filing a request 
with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add Global Plus 1C and 2C 
Negotiated Service Agreements to the Competitive Products List.

DATES: January 18, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret M. Falwell, (202) 268-2576.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[reg] hereby 
gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642, on December 30, 2011, 
and January 4, 2012, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission, 
Requests of United States Postal Service to Add Global Plus 1C and 2C 
Negotiated Service Agreements to the Competitive Products List, and 
Notices of Filing Two Functionally Equivalent Agreements and 
Applications for Non-Public Treatment of Materials Filed Under Seal for 
each filing. Documents are available at http://www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. 
MC2012-5, MC2012-6, CP2012-10, CP2012-11, CP2012-12 and CP2012-13.

B. J. Meadows III,
Attorney, Legal Strategy.
[FR Doc. 2012-766 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P