alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 10.17**

 

LEASE RENEWAL AGREEMENT

 

PARTIES:

 

LEE JOINT VENTURE, a joint venture of Robert B. Lee, Ronald E. Lee,and, Terry N. Lee (“Lessor”)

 

and

 

COUNTRY COACH, INC., an Oregon corporation (“Tenant”)

 

RECITALS:

 

A.                                   Lessorand Tenant are parties to that certain real property lease dated October 12,1995, a copy of which is attached hereto (“Lease”).

 

B.                                     TheLease provides in paragraph 21 for Tenant to have two options to renew the Lease,each for an additional period of five years, by giving written notice to Lessornot less than 90 days prior to the expiration date of the initial term of the Leaseor the current renewal term of the Lease, whichever is applicable.

 

C.                                     Byletter dated October 26, 2000, Tenant gave notice of its desire to exercisethe option to renew said Lease for one additional period of five years commencingon November 1, 2000, and ending on October 31, 2005 (the “Renewal Term”).Despite the fact that the notice of the option to renew was not timely given, theparties wish to renew the Lease as though notice of the option to renew hadbeen timely given.

 

AGREEMENTS:

 

1.                                       Recitals.The above recitals are deemed true and are incorporated herein.

 

2.                                       RenewalPeriod. For valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, theparties hereby agree that the Lease be deemed renewed for the Renewal Term onthe terms and conditions provided for in the Lease as though the Tenant hadgiven timely written notice thereof to Lessor pursuant to Paragraph 21 of theLease.

 
| DATED this 2nd day of January 2001. |                |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------|
|                                     |                |
|                                     | LEE JOINT VENTURE   |
|                                     |                |
|                                     | By:                 | /s/ Robert B. Lee |   |
|                                     |                | ROBERT B. LEE |
|                                     |                |
|                                     | By:                 | /s/ Ronald E. Lee |   |
|                                     |                | RONALD E. LEE |
|                                     |                |
|                                     | By:                 | /s/ Terry N. Lee |   |
|                                     |                | TERRY N. LEE |
|                                     |                |
|                                     | COUNTRY COACH, INC. |
|                                     |                |
|                                     | By:                 | /s/ Jack L. Courtemanche |   |
|                                     |                | JACK L. COURTEMANCHE |
|                                     |                | Chairman, CEO |
|                                          |                     |  |  |  |  |

 

1

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EMMA MARTIN; ELIZABETH 

GAGLIANO; KATHRYN SESSINGHAUS, 

individually and as heirs of Vincent Paul 

Martin, deceased, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 v. 

SERRANO POST ACUTE LLC, DBA 

Hollywood Premier Healthcare Center, AKA 

Serrano Healthcare, AKA Serrano North 

Convalescent Hospital; BENJAMIN 

LANDA, an individual, 

Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

MARCEL ADRIAN SOLERO FILART, an 

individual; DOES, 1-50, 

Defendants.

No. 21-55400 

D.C. No. 

2:21-cv-00187-DSF-SK 

MEMORANDUM*

EMMA MARTIN; ELIZABETH 

GAGLIANO; KATHRYN SESSINGHAUS, 

individually and as heirs of Vincent Paul 

Martin, deceased, 

No. 21-55403 

D.C. No. 

2:21-cv-00187-DSF-SK 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

JUN 21 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 v. 

MARCEL ADRIAN SOLERO FILART, an 

individual, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

and 

SERRANO POST ACUTE LLC, DBA 

Hollywood Premier Healthcare Center, AKA 

Serrano Healthcare, AKA Serrano North 

Convalescent Hospital; BENJAMIN 

LANDA, an individual; DOES, 1-50, 

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 20, 2023**

Before: WALLACE, O’SCANNLAIN, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Marcel Adrian Solero Filart, Serrano Post Acute LLC, and Benjamin Landa 

(collectively, Defendants) appeal the district court’s order of March 25, 2021, 

remanding this case to state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
3 

Defendants argue that the district court had three independent grounds for federal 

jurisdiction: federal officer removal, complete preemption of state law, and the 

presence of an embedded federal question.

However, Defendants are collaterally estopped from arguing any of these 

grounds for jurisdiction. The doctrine of collateral estoppel forecloses relitigation of 

an issue that is “identical” to one “actually litigated” and “necessar[ily]” decided in 

a prior action. Clark v. Bear Stearns & Co., 966 F.2d 1318, 1320 (9th Cir. 1992). 

Here, Defendants previously appealed the district court’s remand order of September 

10, 2020, presenting the same claims, arguments, and evidence as in the instant 

appeal. Martin v. Filart, No. 20-56067, 2022 WL 576012 (February 22, 2022).1 We 

affirmed the district court’s remand for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction—

and our determination of the federal officer removal, complete preemption, and 

embedded federal question issues, id. at *1, was a critical and necessary part of the 

judgment. Defendants are precluded from relitigating these issues here.

AFFIRMED.

1 The motions for judicial notice of the first district court order, Dkt. #21, and of 

Defendants’ opening briefs in the first appeal, Dkt. #31, are GRANTED.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1550 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

  2d Session
                                S. 1550

 To eliminate the duties on 2-Amino-3-chlorobenzoic acid, methyl ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 1, 1996

   Mr. Helms introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To eliminate the duties on 2-Amino-3-chlorobenzoic acid, methyl ester.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF DUTY ON 2-AMINO-3-CHLOROBENZOIC ACID, METHYL 
              ESTER.

    Subheading 2922.49.05 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States is amended by inserting after ``acid'' the following: ``; 
2-Amino-3-chlorobenzoic acid, methyl ester''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 applies with respect to goods 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 
15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1474 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1474

To provide new authority for probation and pretrial services officers, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 13, 1995

   Mr. Hatch introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide new authority for probation and pretrial services officers, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. NEW AUTHORITY FOR PROBATION AND PRETRIAL SERVICES OFFICERS.

    (a) Probation Officers.--Section 3603 of title 18, United States 
Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (8)(B);
            (2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
            (3) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(9) if approved by the district court, be authorized to 
        carry firearms under such rules and regulations as the Director 
        of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts may 
        prescribe; and''.
    (b) Pretrial Services Officers.--Section 3154 of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (13) as paragraph (14); and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (12) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(13) As approved by the district court, carry firearms 
        under such rules and regulations as the Director of the 
        Administrative Office of the United States Courts may 
        prescribe.''.
                                 <all>
```
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1546

To increase the debt limit.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 30, 1996

Mr. DASCHLE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To increase the debt limit.

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

3 TITLE V—PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT

4 SEC. . INCREASE IN PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT.

5 Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United

6 States Code, is amended by striking the dollar amount

7 contained in the first sentence and inserting

8 ‘‘$5,400,000,000,000’’.

Æ
**Exhibit
      32.1**








**Certification
      of the Chief Executive Officer**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





I,
      Stephen Brock, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report
      of
      Public Company Management Corporation on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarterly period
      ended June 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
      in
      such Form 10-QSB/A fairly presents in all material respects the financial
      condition and results of operations of Public Company Management
      Corporation.





Date:
      December 8, 2006





By:  /s/
      Stephen Brock


Stephen
      Brock,


Chief
      Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                           MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                         321,509
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    3,634
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                                     67,707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               395,098
<PP&E>                                                           4,413
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   2,361
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 397,150
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          165,435
<BONDS>                                                              0
<COMMON>                                                         1,865
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     229,850
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   397,150
<SALES>                                                        245,309
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               245,309
<CGS>                                                          174,722
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  174,722
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               134,792
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                (47,283)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            (47,283)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   (47,283)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                     (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                     (.03)



</TABLE>
Order filed November 29, 2016 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00494-CV

____________

IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE ESTATE OF LILY SHESHTAWY, A 

MINOR, Appellant

On Appeal from the Probate Court No 1

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 425,238

O R D E R

A clerk’s record was filed June 26, 2015, and a supplemental clerk’s record 

was filed on July 25, 2016. Our review has determined that a relevant item has 

been omitted from the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). The record does 

not contain Valentina Shestway's Motion for New Trial and for Vacation of Order 

Naming her a Vexatious Litigant filed July 15, 2015.

The Harris County Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record on 

or before December 09, 2016, containing Valentina Shestway's Motion for New 
Trial and for Vacation of Order Naming her a Vexatious Litigant filed July 15, 

2015.

If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to 

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted 

item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 32.2



Certification



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Nexstar Finance, L.L.C.
and Nexstar Finance, Inc. (together, the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|Dated:  November 14, 2003 |  | /s/    G. Robert Thompson                                           
|------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|                          |  | G. Robert Thompson                                                  
|                          |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
----

            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE         

No 108/2006

of 22 September 2006         

amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

Chapter III of Annex I to the Agreement shall be amended as specified in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

The texts of Directives 2003/90/EC, 2003/91/EC and 2005/91/EC and Decisions 2005/841/EC, 2005/886/EC and 2005/947/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 23 September 2006, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 22 September 2006.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Oda Helen SLETNES            

----

(1)OJ L 53, 23.2.2006, p. 38.

(2)OJ L 254, 8.10.2003, p. 7.

(3)OJ L 254, 8.10.2003, p. 11.

(4)OJ L 312, 29.11.2005, p. 65.

(5)OJ L 326, 13.12.2005, p. 39.

(6)OJ L 331, 17.12.2005, p. 24.

(7)OJ L 342, 24.12.2005, p. 103.

(8)OJ L 103, 2.5.1972, p. 6.

(9)OJ L 108, 8.5.1972, p. 8.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

----

ANNEX

to Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 108/2006

Chapter III of Annex I to the Agreement shall be amended as follows:

----
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 124 (Friday, September 14, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6059-H6060]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                  REPORTED BILL SEQUENTIALLY REFERRED

  Under clause 2 of rule XII, bills and reports were delivered to the 
Clerk for printing, and bills referred as follows:

       Mr. MICA: Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 
     H.R. 2903. A bill to reauthorize the programs and activities 
     of the

[[Page H6060]]

     Federal Emergency Management Agency, with an amendment; 
     (Rept. 112-674, Pt. 1); Referred to the Committee on Homeland 
     Security for a period ending not later than September 17, 
     2012, for a period ending not later than September 17, 2012, 
     for consideration of such provisions of the bill and 
     amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee 
     pursuant to clause 1(j) of rule X.

                          ____________________
```
Order filed November 30, 2021

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

Nos. 11-21-00145-CR & 11-21-00200-CR

__________

DANIEL RAY GARCIA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 106th District Court

Gaines County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 19-5086 & 16-4669 

O R D E R

Before this court is a pro se motion related to the clerk’s records and the 

reporter’s records that were filed in these causes. We note that Appellant filed the 

motion in each cause on November 1, 2021, before most of the records were even 

due to be filed in this court. The records filed in this court have now been provided 

to Appellant by the district clerk and the court reporter. Therefore, Appellant’s 

motion is moot in this regard.
2

Appellant also complains of omissions from the clerk’s record in Cause 

No. 11-21-00200-CR (trial court cause no. 16-4669). Appellant asserts that the 

district clerk is required “to send all documents.” Appellant is incorrect. The 

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that, unless otherwise specifically 

designated by a party, a clerk’s record in a criminal appeal shall, if applicable, 

include the following documents: the indictment or information, any special plea or 

defense motion that was presented to the court and overruled, any written waiver or 

stipulation, any plea documents, the court’s docket sheet, the jury charge and verdict, 

findings of fact and conclusions of law, the judgment or order that is being appealed, 

a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, post-judgment motions and any 

rulings thereon, the notice of appeal, any bill of exception, the certification of 

Appellant’s right of appeal, and any request for the preparation of the reporter’s 

record and the clerk’s record. TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(a).

Here, the clerk of the district court certified that “all of the documents 

specified by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(a) and all other documents 

timely requested by a party to this proceeding under Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 34.5(b)” were included in the clerk’s record. Appellant did not file a 

designation of record with the trial court clerk identifying specific, additional items

to be included in the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(a)(13), (b).

Furthermore, we note that some of the omissions about which Appellant complains

in his motion, such as police statements and witness statements, were likely not even 

filed with the district clerk. Based on our review of the clerk’s record, it does not 

appear that the clerk’s record is defective or inaccurate; therefore, we deny 

Appellant’s request to supplement or correct the record. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 34.5(c), (d). 
3

Next, Appellant complains about the form of the reporter’s record and the 

color of the district clerk’s file stamp. These complaints are without merit.

Accordingly, we deny Appellant’s motion in part and dismiss the motion in 

part as moot.

PER CURIAM

November 30, 2021

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., 

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD 

Environmental Engineering Committee 

Public Teleconference 

August 16, 2010, 1:00 – 4:30 p.m. EDT 

Agenda 

Purpose: Receive briefings on the current status of EPA's vision for innovative, sustainable 

technologies, and EPA’s research activities regarding carbon sequestration and sustainability. 

Monday, August 16, 2010 

1:00 pm Opening Remarks and Roll Call Mr. Edward Hanlon 

Designated Federal Officer 

EPA Science Advisory Board 

Staff Office 

1:10 pm Purpose of the Call and Review of Agenda Dr. David Dzombak 

Chair 

1:15 pm	 Public Comments Registered Speakers 

1:30 pm	 EPA's Vision for Innovative, Sustainable Ms. Minerva Rojo 

Technologies EPA Office of the Science 

Advisor 

2:30 pm	 EPA’s Progress on Geologic Sequestration – Mr. Bruce Kobelski and 

Rule Development and Research Mr. Sean Porse 

EPA Office of Water 

Dr. Audrey Levine 

EPA Office of Research 

and Development 

3:30 pm	 EPA’s Research Activities Associated With Dr. Alan Hecht 

Sustainability EPA Office of Research 

and Development 

4:25 pm	 Concluding Remarks and Action Item Dr. David Dzombak 

Summary Chair 

4:30 pm	 Adjourn Mr. Edward Hanlon