alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Second Amendment to the Employment with Joel K. Mostrom



 Exhibit 10.4 
  
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO 
 EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of August 12, 2005, between Chesapeake Corporation, a Virginia corporation (the “Company”), and Joel K. Mostrom (the “Executive”). 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into an amended and
restated Executive Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated April 22, 2003, amended on January 3, 2005; and 
  
 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Agreement may be amended by mutual consent of the Company and the Executive; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Agreement;

  
 NOW THEREFORE, the Agreement is hereby amended in the
following respects: 
  
 Section 1 (b) is amended to read as
follows: 
  
 (b) The period described in paragraph (a) shall be
extended for an additional twelve months unless the Company, before each November 1 of any year, provides written notice to the Executive that the period will not be extended. The preceding sentence shall first be effective to extend the period
described in paragraph (a) until December 31, 2007, unless written notice to the contrary is provided to the Executive by the Company before November 1, 2005. 
  

Except as provided above, the terms of the Agreement, dated April 22, 2003, and amended January 3, 2005 shall remain in effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Second Amendment to
Executive Employment Agreement to be duly executed on its behalf and the Executive has duly executed this Second Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement, all as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	EXECUTIVE	 	CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION
		
	 /s/ Joel K. Mostrom

	 	 /s/ J.P. Causey Jr.


	Joel K. Mostrom	 	J.P. Causey Jr.
	 	 	 Executive Vice President, Secretary &
 General
Counsel
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 Design Source, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Peter Reichard, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

Dated this 14th day of August, 2007.





| | PETER REICHARD                                     
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| | Peter Reichard                                     
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-12-0000103

30-DEC-2015

08:56 AM
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 08, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 08, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19D0292. HENRY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION v. JAMES RUTLEDGE.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 16CV3187
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 Quarterly
Report of Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission of the date herein (the Report), I, Adam Wasserman, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to SS. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge and believe:  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 result of operations of the Company.  /s/ Adam Wasserman Adam Wasserman, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer  February 21, 2008  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    Home





    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos

    Coronavirus Disease 2019

    Air Force Art Collection





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    CSAF Leadership Library    
        CSAF Leadership Library 2021

    2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List

    2015 CSAF Reading List

    2014 CSAF Reading List

    2013 CSAF Reading List

    2012 CSAF Reading List

    2011 CSAF Reading List

    2010 CSAF Reading List

    2009 CSAF Reading List

    2008 CSAF Reading List

    2007 CSAF Reading List

    2006 CSAF Reading List

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2021

    Focus on Priorities

    Empowered Airmen





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers





    Contact Us  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (4.64 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR ActOSI Tip Line
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2021-2 (the“Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: WilmingtonTrust, National Association. 

 
By: 
/s/ Corey Henry
Name: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 31, 2023**
Urudad Administrabva Especoal 

Bogota D.C., Julio 2 de 2014 

1063054.1-- 2014030449 

Senor 

Paul Gretch 

Director. Office of International Aviation 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S. E. 

Washington , D.C. 20590 

Estimado Sr. Gretch: 

La autoridad de Aviaci6n Civil de Colombia per solicitud de Ia aerolinea colombiana, 

LINEA AEREA CARGUERA DE COLOMBIA S.A. , LANGO para efectuar operaciones 

charter en Ia ruta MIAMI-SAN JOSE-MIAMI, confirma per Ia presente al Departamento de 

Transporte de los Estados Unidos que, en adici6n a los derechos previstos en el Acuerdo 

de Transporte Aereo entre Colombia y Estados Unidos del 10 de mayo de 2011, el 

Gobierno de Colombia otorgara su aprobaci6n, sabre Ia base de reciprocidad, a las 

solicitudes de las campania aereas de Estados Unidos para operar vuelos charter de 

carga con derechos de septima libertad, en el entendido de que el gobierno de los 

Estados Unidos concedera los mismos derechos a las companias aereas designadas per 

Colombia. 

Sin otro particular, reciba un cordial saluda 

ficina de Transporte Aereo (e) 

Proyect6: Ma. Isabel Rojas. Grupe Asuntos lnternacionales y Regulatorios 

Revis6: Claudia Esguerra Barragan, Jefe Grupe Asuntos lnternacionales y Regulatorios 

Ruta electr6nica: \\bog7\AOI\Externo\2014030449
[No. 19650-6-II.

Division Two.

August 9, 1996.]

#### Maurice W. Farrell, *Appellant,*v. Sloop Inc., *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 94-2-04058-1, Edwin L. Poyfair J., entered June 20, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Turner, J., concurred in by Houghton, A.C.J., and Morgan, J.
**Exhibit
32.2**
 
 **ACCERIS
COMMUNICATIONS INC.**
 
 **OFFICER’S
CERTIFICATION**
 **PURSUANT
TO**
 **SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 **(18
U.S.C. 1350)**
 
 
 The
undersigned Gary M. Clifford, duly appointed and incumbent officer of Acceris
Communications Inc., a Florida corporation (the “Corporation”), in connection
with the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended
December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), does hereby represent, warrant and certify pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, that, to the best
of his knowledge:
 
 1.
    The
      Report is in full compliance with reporting requirements of Section 13(a)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and
 
 2.
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
      Corporation.
  ****Date: March 28,
2005
    By:
    /s/ Gary M.
  CliffordGary M. CliffordChief
      Financial Officer and Vice President of
Finance
[No. 35537-6-I.

Division One.

August 19, 1996.]

#### *In the Matter of the Custody of*D.C.G. E.N.F.G., *Appellant,*v. M.D.P., *Respondent.*

Appeals from judgments of the Superior Court for What-com County, No. 93-3-00233-5, Michael F. Moynihan, J., entered October 3, 1994. *Affirmed in part*and *reversed in part*by unpublished opinion per Webster, J., concurred in by Agid and Ellington, JJ.
107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 314

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the members of AMVETS for their

service to the Nation and supporting the goal ofAMVETS National Charter Day.

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 314

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas on July 23, 1947, AMVETS (American Veterans of

World War II, Korea, and Vietnam) was chartered by the

United States as a not-for-profit corporation;

Whereas membership in AMVETS is open to veterans who

have honorably served, or are serving, in the Armed

Forces, including the Coast Guard, National Guard, and

Reserves, during or since World War II;
2

•HCON 314 EH

Whereas the veterans of the Armed Forces have made great

sacrifices to ensure the peace and security of the United

States;

Whereas the members of AMVETS are dedicated to providing important services to their local communities and

to their fellow veterans;

Whereas the motto of AMVETS is ‘‘We fought together, now

let’s build together’’;

Whereas the members of AMVETS consistently honor that

motto through countless hours of patriotic service, including providing services to hospitalized veterans, assisting

veterans with their problems regarding housing and employment, marching in parades, participating in color

guards and burial details, and educating the Nation’s

youth;

Whereas the war on terrorism has emphasized the sacrifices

that veterans have made, and continue to make, for the

benefit of the Nation;

Whereas AMVETS has designated July 23 as AMVETS National Charter Day; and

Whereas the goal of AMVETS National Charter Day is to

raise public awareness regarding AMVETS’s commitment

and service to veterans, the families of veterans, and the

Nation: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress recognizes the members of

3 AMVETS (American Veterans of World War II, Korea,
3

•HCON 314 EH

1 and Vietnam) for their service to the Nation and supports

2 the goal of AMVETS National Charter Day.

Passed the House of Representatives May 20, 2002.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Robert S. LYONS and Charlotte Whitted, Appellants, v. WYDER TOURS, INC., d/b/a Wyder Travel, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

Nos. 89-464, 88-2703.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 6, 1989.

Robert S. Lyons, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Michael A. Nuzzo, Miami, for appellee.

Before NESBITT, BASKIN and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. McCarson,*467 So.2d 277 (Fla.1985); *1320
      *Applegate v. Barnett Bank,*377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
NO. 07-10-0384-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

JULY 8, 2011

RONALD LAWSON FRANS, II,  

	Appellant 

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,  

	Appellee

___________________________

FROM THE 84TH DISTRICT COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;

NO. 10,249; HONORABLE WILLIAM D. SMITH, PRESIDING

***Memorandum Opinion***

Before QUINN, C.J., HANCOCK, J., and BOYD, S.J.[footnoteRef:1] [1: John T. Boyd, Senior Justice, sitting by assignment.] 

	Appellant, Ronald Lawson Frans II, appeals his two convictions for aggravated sexual assault of a child and his two convictions for indecency with a child.  Through his first several issues, he contends that the State failed to prove he penetrated the child’s sexual organ as alleged in the indictment.  His last two issues concern the accuracy of the sentence memorialized in the written judgment; that is, it purports to levy fines for each conviction though such fines went unmentioned when sentence was orally pronounced in open court.  We affirm the judgment as modified.  

	Regarding whether the State proved appellant penetrated his victim’s sexual organ, appellant admitted to rubbing the child’s clitoris.  The clitoris lies within or under the upper portions of the labia.  Thus, rubbing it involved some measure of penetration through the external folds of the labia into the vaginal cavity.  And, because it did, the record contained some evidence upon which a rational jury could deduce, beyond resonable doubt, that appellant penetrated the child’s sexual organ.  *See Luna v. State*, 515 S.W.2d 271, 273 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (noting that evidence of the slightest penetration is sufficient to uphold a conviction, so long as it has been shown beyond a reasonable doubt); *see also Vernon v. State*, 841 S.W.2d 407, 409 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (stating that mere contact with the outside of an object does not amount to a penetration of it, but the pushing aside and reaching beneath a natural fold of skin into an area of the body not usually exposed to view, even in nakedness, is a significant intrusion beyond mere external contact and sufficient to constitute penetration).  

	As for the allegation concerning the variance between the sentence as pronounced in open court and expressed in the written judgment, the record discloses such a difference.  The trial court orally pronounced the assessment of a $10,000 fine *viz*Count I but failed to mention a fine when orally sentencing appellant on the remaining three counts.  Furthermore, the State agreed that this occurred and that it constituted error.  

	A defendant's sentence must be pronounced orally in his presence.  *Taylor v. State*, 131 S.W.3d 497, 500 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004).  When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence appearing in the judgment, the former controls.  *Id.*   Therefore, we modify the judgment to remove reference to the imposition of $10,000 fines as part of the sentences relating to appellant’s convictions under counts two, three and four of the indictment.  

	The trial court’s judgment is affirmed as modified.

							Brian Quinn

							Chief Justice

Do not publish.

3
Leone, Kevin

From: Sent: Colleen Delaney [cdelaney@utah.gov] Friday, May 31,2013 7:47AM To: Leone, Kevin Cc: Dave Mcneill Subject: Utah rule change process

When we submitrule changes to EPA, part ofthe submittal is the administrative documentation. This documentationusually contains the memos to the Board explaining the proposed and final versions ofthe rules
to be considered as well as the official versions ofthe proposed and final documents that are publishedby the Utah Division ofAdminstrative Rules (DAR) in the State Bulletin. DARrequires publication ofthe entire rule that is being changed. This requirement led to some confusion inthe 1990s because atthe time most ofUtah's air pollution requirements were located in one gigantic rule that included permitting, emission inventories, emission standards, and many otherprovisions. This rule was constantly being changed as Utah implemented the requirements ofthe 1990 Clean AirAct, and sometimesthere were changes occurring simultaneously in different parts ofthe rule. The Board would treat each ofthese changes as separate agenda items, but DAR procedures required them to publish the entire rule in the State Bulletin. Another quirk ofthis process was that ifthe Boardproposed a change in one section in May, and then another section in June, the June proposal would containthe May language as ifit had already been adopted. Itwould all be sorted out in the final version ofthe rule, but was very confusing for EPA when reviewing Utah's submittals.

In 1999 Utah resolved this problem by breaking apart R307-1 into a number ofsmallerrules that were easierto manage. Since thattime the submittals have been clearer and DAR's publication ofproposed and final rules in the State Bulletinhas been limited to the specific rule that is being changed. However, there are still a few old submittals thatpredate this rules reorganization and the administrative documentation contains the gigantic rule R307-l.

One ofthese old submittals contains changes to Utah's minor source permitting rules that were submitted in 1998. The Board adopted changes to R307-1-1 (definitions), R307-1-3.1 (minor source permitting rule) and also a small change to R307-15-6 to change a reference to a provision that had been changed in R307-1-3.1. When this revision was submitted to EPA in 1998, we included the official DARdocumentation showing the proposed and final versions ofR307-1 that includedmany unrelatedprovisions. We did not intend for EPA to review all ofthe unrelated provisions in R307-1 as part ofthe submittal. Instead, the intent was for EPA to review the portions ofthe rule that had been changed for that particularrulemaking.

Please let me know ifyou have any questions about this process.

Colleen Delaney Utah Division ofAir Quality (801) 536-4248 cdelaney@utah.gov

1