alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.37

     NationsBank
     Commercial Banking
     100 Southeast 2nd Street, 15th Floor
     Miami, FL 33131
     Fax 305 533-2681


NATIONSBANK

     December 1, 1998


     Precision Response Corporation
     1505 N.W. 167th Street
     Miami, Florida 33165

     Attention:     Mr. Joseph E. Gillis
                    Vice President and Treasurer

     RE:    (1)     SECOND AMENDMENT TO REVOLVING CREDIT AGREEMENT DATED AS OF 
                    SEPTEMBER 30, 1998  
            (2)     SECOND AMENDMENT TO MORTGAGE LOAN AGREEMENT DATED AS OF 
                    SEPTEMBER 30, 1998

     Dear Mr. Gillis:

     Pursuant to our telephone conversations, this letter will confirm that the
     definition of "Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio" which appears in the Second
     Amendment to Revolving Credit Agreement and in the Second Amendment to
     Mortgage Loan Agreement inadvertently omitted reference to the Harland
     Debt. The correct definition is as follows (previously omitted words are
     underlined):

     6.03 FIXED CHARGE COVERAGE RATIO. Permit the ratio of (a) the sum of EBITDA
          for any Four-Quarter Period plus Rents Expense for such Four-Quarter
          Period to (b) the sum of interest expense for such Four-Quarter Period
          plus Rents Expense for such Four-Quarter Period plus income tax
          expense for such Four-Quarter Period plus 20% of Funded Debt (BUT
          EXCLUDING THE HARLAND DEBT) outstanding as of the last day of the
          applicable Four-Quarter Period PLUS THE CURRENT MATURITIES OF THE
          HARLAND DEBT to be less than 1.80 to 1.00 as of the last day of each
          Four-Quarter Period.


     Very truly yours,
     NATIONSBANK, N.A.

     /s/ Charles E. Porter
     -----------------------------
     Charles E. Porter
     Senior Vice President
SAT Chair: 

 Fate assessor: Ecotox assessor: Health assessor:
NO. 07-01-0320 -CV IN THE COU RT OF APP EALS FOR THE SEVENT H DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMA RILLO PANE L D AUGUST 28 , 2001

______________________________

DESA W ELLS, Appellant
v. BRE TON M ILL AP

ARTM ENTS Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE COUNT Y COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF HARR IS COUNTY; NO. 749,853; HON. CYNTHIA CROW E, PRESIDING

_______________________________ Before BOYD, C.J., QUINN and REAVIS, JJ. Desa Wel ls (appellant) attempted to perf ect an appeal to this Court on Ju ne 28, 2001. By letter dated A ugust 14, 2001, w e informed her t hat the filing fee of $125.00 required to perfect this appeal was outstanding and that the failure to pay sam e by August 24, 2001 w

ould result in the dismissal of the cause. To date, no such filing fee has been received from W ells. Due to that circum stance, w e dismiss the appeal pursuant to Tex as Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 (c).
Pe r C ur i amDo not publish.
EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of WellPoint Health Networks Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Leonard D. Schaeffer, Chief Executive 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/LEONARD D. SCHAEFFER

---

Leonard D. Schaeffer Chief Executive OfficerDate:  March 15, 2004

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.

---

QuickLinks
#### Herbert Lee SANDERS et al., Appellants, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 29726.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 7, 1958.

A. W. Salyars, Lubbock, for appellant.

William J. Gillespie, County Atty., Alton R. Griffin, Asst. County Atty., Lubbock, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*661MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

Three bond forfeiture cases were consolidated in the trial court and were appealed to this Court as one case. ■

On April 10, July 17 and August 18, 1956, appellants entered into three bail bonds in Lubbock County to answer certain charges of violations of the liquor laws. Judgments nisi were entered on the three bonds on June 3, September 16 and September 18, 1957.

On August 23‘, 1957, probation in a child desertion case in the District Court of Potter County against the principal was revoked, and he was committed to the Texas penitentiary to serve a two-year sentence.

The sole question presented for review is the correctness of the trial court’s ruling that such confinement of the principal did not exonerate him and his sureties under the terms of Subd. 3 of Article 436, V.A.C. C.P., in the last two cases.

The rule seems to be well settled, both in this and other jurisdictions, that, where the principal is confined in jail or the penitentiary by virtue of a commitment from the same court or another court in the State at the time his bond is forfeited, such confinement exonerates both the principal and his sureties for the reason as stated by Judge Henderson in Woods v. State, 51 Tex.Cr.R. 595, 103 S.W. 895, 896, “as the very government which held him amenable to the charge in Bosque county had taken jurisdiction of him in Plamilton county.” See also Wheeler v. State, 38 Tex. 173; Cooper v. State, 5 Tex.App. 215; Stafford v. State, 10 Tex.App. 46; Allee v. State, 28 Tex.App. 531, 13 S.W. 991; Annotation, 4 A.L.R.2d 440.

Inasmuch as the record reveals that the principal was confined in the Texas penitentiary by virtue of a commitment issued out of the District Court of Potter County at the time the judgments nisi were entered in the trial court causes numbered 8373 and 8387, the judgments in said causes are reversed.

Since there is no such showing as to cause No. 8249, the judgment in such cause is affirmed.
BB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0453

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SCOTT KELLY WALSH,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 14-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to 

and including October 29, 2022, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

October 14 2022

10/14/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0453
<PAGE>   1

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.7(e)

                            PROMISSORY NOTE




$425,000.00                              Date: January 15, 1998


Compressent Corporation hereby promises to pay $425,000.00 to Mr. Ted Cooper at
P.O. Box 36007, San Jose, CA 95158 on demand or within thirty (30) days with
interest rate at 15% per annum.

Compressent Corporation hereby agree to pay the commitment fee of four percent
(4%) of the amount lent to the Company prior to February 15, 1998.

Compressent Corporation hereby agrees to issue 100,000 warrants to purchase
100,000 shares of Common Stock at $6.25 per share for period of three years.


/s/ WON-GIL CHOE                         /s/ EDWARD T. KALINOSKI
-----------------------                  --------------------------------
Won-Gil Choe                             Edward T. Kalinoski 
Chief Executive Officer                  Member of the Board of Director
Compressent Corporation                  Compressent Corporation
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Curis, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended
September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Daniel R. Passeri, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: October 30, 2007



/s/ DANIEL R. PASSERIDaniel R. PasseriPresident and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1995 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
                                S. 1995

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To authorize construction of the Smithsonian Institution National Air 
   and Space Museum Dulles Center at Washington Dulles International 
                    Airport, 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. CONSTRUCTION OF MUSEUM CENTER.

    The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution is authorized 
to construct the Smithsonian Institution National Air and Space Museum 
Dulles Center at Washington Dulles International Airport.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS.

    No appropriated funds may be used to pay any expense of the 
construction authorized by section 1.

            Passed the Senate July 31, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1995

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To authorize construction of the Smithsonian Institution National Air 
   and Space Museum Dulles Center at Washington Dulles International 
                    Airport, and for other purposes.
```
Exhibit 10.2

                        CEDAR MOUNTAIN DISTRIBUTORS, INC.
                              1065 West 1150 South
                                 Provo, UT 84601

                                  May 12, 2005

VIA EMAIL
Mr. Hakan Wretsell
iCurie Lab Holdings, Ltd.
12 Plumtree Court
London, EC4A4HT

Dear Mr. Wretsell:

         On or about March 30, 2005, iCurie Lab Holdings, Ltd. ("iCurie") and
Cedar Mountain Distributors, Inc. ("Cedar") executed a letter agreement (the
"Agreement"). The Agreement provided for $50,000 to be placed in escrow while
iCurie conducted a due diligence investigation. This is to confirm that the
Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

         1)       The $50,000 in escrow funds shall be immediately released to
                  Cedar and is not refundable under any circumstances except as
                  expressly set forth in paragraph 2).

         2)       If, on or before June 30, 2005, Cedar shall have merged into
                  or with, or combined with, another entity or sold
                  substantially all of its assets to another entity (or acquired
                  substantially all of the assets of another entity), or
                  consummated a similar transaction with another entity, or
                  caused or permitted any change in the capitalization or
                  ownership of the capital stock of the Company, or agreed to do
                  any of the foregoing, in each case other than in connection
                  with a possible transaction with iCurie, then Cedar shall
                  promptly return the $50,000 to iCurie.

         This letter agreement shall also act as authorization for and
instruction to Escrow Agent (as defined in the Agreement) to immediately release
the $50,000 in funds to Cedar that it is holding in escrow pursuant to the
Agreement.

         The Agreement, as amended by this letter agreement, contains the entire
understanding of the parties, supersedes all prior oral or written agreements,
and shall be binding upon successors and assigns with respect to the subject
matter hereof.

         This letter agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and
each such counterpart shall be deemed to be an original instrument, but all of
such counterparts together shall constitute but one agreement.

<PAGE>

         If the foregoing correctly sets forth the substance of the
understanding between the parties, please execute this letter in duplicate.
Retain one copy for your records and return one to us.

                                               Very truly yours,

                                               CEDAR MOUNTAIN DISTRIBUTORS, INC.

                                               /s/ Brenda Hall

                                               Brenda Hall
                                               President

AGREED AND APPROVED:

ICURIE LAB HOLDINGS, LTD.

/s/ Hakan Wretsell

Hakan Wretsell
CEO
Victoria Mari 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

Thursday, April 30, 2015

No. 04-15-00239-CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

Victoria Mari VELASQUEZ,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 6, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 478295

Honorable Wayne A. Christian, Judge Presiding

ORDER

This is an appeal by the State of the trial court’s order granting a motion to suppress. The 

State has filed a motion requesting this court to abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial 

court for the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with State v. Cullen, 

195 S.W.3d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). The motion is GRANTED. This appeal is abated, and 

the cause is remanded to the trial court. The trial court is instructed to cause a supplemental 

clerk’s record to be filed in this court containing the trial court’s written findings of fact and 

conclusions of law no later than thirty days from the date of this order. The stay imposed by this 

court on April 23, 2015, pursuant to article 44.01(e) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, is 

lifted to the extent necessary to allow the trial court to comply with this order.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 30th day of April, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Opinion filed April 26 , 2012



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________



### No. 11

- 1 2

- 00 0 88

- CR

__________

KELLY PATRICK AMOS , Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 385 th District Court

Midland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CR38802

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Kelly Patrick Amos filed a pro se notice of appeal. Upon reviewing the file in this case,

this court notified appellant by letter dated April 5, 2012, that the trial court had certified that

appellant had no right of appeal and that appellant had waived his right of appeal. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d). We requested that appellant respond and show grounds to continue the

appeal. Appellant has responded and requests that his appeal be continued based upon the

injurious pretrial conduct of his trial counsel. We dismiss the appeal.2

The clerk’s record indicates that appellant was charged with two counts of theft of

property, that he entered i nto a plea bargain agreement with the State in each count, that he

signed in each count a written waiver of his right to appeal, and that he pleaded guilty to both

counts . The trial court assessed punishment pursuant to the terms of the plea bargain in ea ch

count a t confinement in a state jail facility for fourteen months

. Thus, the trial court’s

certifi cation in each count is supported by the record and is not defective. See Dears v. State

,

154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). These certifications reflect that appellant has no right

to appeal and also that he waived his right to appeal. Because appellant’s appeal is prohibited by

Rule 25.2, we must dismiss t he appeal without further action. Rule 25.2( d); Chavez v. State , 183

S.W.3d 67 5, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

Accordingly, t h is appeal is di smissed

.

PER CURIAM

April 26, 2012

Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Kalenak , J.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 97-4697 DANIEL RAY MCKINNEY, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-97-80) Submitted: July 7, 1998 Decided: July 28, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Deborah R. J. Shupe, LOUTHIAN & LOUTHIAN, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. William Earl Day, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM: Daniel Ray McKinney appeals from the district court's judgment sentencing him to an eighty-seven month term of imprisonment for armed robbery of a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C.A.§ 2113 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). McKinney's attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that the appeal does not present any meritorious issues. McKinney was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief and has not done so. B ecause we find no reversible error, we affirm. The sole issue is whether the court erred by enhancing the sentence five levels for using a firearm during a robbery. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B3.1(b)(2) (1995). McKinney contends that the enhancement was in error because the plea agreement required the Government to dismiss one count of using a firearm in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c)(1) (West Supp. 1998). McKinney contends that this barred the Government from seeking the five-level enhancement. The plea agreement specifically permitted the court to consider information regarding the dismissed counts in considering relevant conduct for sentencing purposes. Thiscourt has held that conduct embodied by dismissed counts can be considered by the sentencing court. See United States v. Williams , 880 F.2d 804 (4th Cir. 1989). Thus, the court did not err. Pursuant to the requirements of Anders , this court has reviewed the record for potential error and has found none. Therefore, we affirm McKinney's conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
List of Documents Submitted by the State of West Virginia

 Letter from Randy Huffman, Cabinet Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental 

Protection to Mr. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region III (3RAOO), 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029

 Final West Virginia State Implementation Plan Revision for Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) 

Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SBI COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          22,228
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,867
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     86,065
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               118,160
<PP&E>                                       6,984,557
<DEPRECIATION>                                (367,202)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,617,335
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          962,288
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  8,365,000
<COMMON>                                         5,345
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,377,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,984,557
<SALES>                                        411,033
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               544,662
<CGS>                                          180,563
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  797,234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,637
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (693,879)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (693,879)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (693,879)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>