alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.20


                    [UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA LETTERHEAD]




November 5, 1998


Ms. Susanna Bennett
Vice President Finance and Corporate Secretary
Printrak International, Inc.
1250 North Tustin Avenue
Anaheim, CA     92807


Re:  First Amendment ("Amendment") to the Amended and Restated Agreement dated
     July 31, 1998 (this Amendment, and the Amended and Restated Loan
     Agreement together called the "Agreement")

Dear Susanna:

     In reference to the Agreement between Union Bank of California, N.A.
("Bank") and Printrak International Inc. ("Borrower"), the Bank and Borrower
desire to amend the Agreement. Capitalized terms used herein which are not
otherwise defined shall have the meaning given them in the Agreement.

     AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT:

     (a) Section 1.1.1, line 5 of the Agreement is hereby amended by
substituting the date "January 4, 2000" for the date "August 2, 1999."

     (b) Section 1.1.1.1, line 10 of the Agreement is hereby amended by
substitution the date "January 4, 2000" for the date "August 2, 1999."

     Except as specifically amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect and is hereby ratified and confirmed. This Amendment
shall not be a waiver of any existing or future default or breach of a
condition or covenant unless specified herein.

     This Amendment shall become effective when the Bank shall have received
the acknowledgment copy of this Amendment executed by the Borrower and the
following executed documents plus an amendment fee of Seven Thousand Five
Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00), all of which must be received before
November 6, 1998.

Very truly yours,
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, N.A.

By:    /s/ Stephen Dunne
       ---------------------------
Title: Vice President/SCE
       ---------------------------


By:    /s/ Burt Yano
       ---------------------------
Title: Senior Vice President
       ---------------------------

Agreed and Accepted to this 5th day of
November, 1998.


PRINTRAK INTERNATIONAL, INC.

By:    /s/ Susanna Bennett
       ---------------------------
Title: Vice President Finance
       and Corporate Secretary
       ---------------------------
EXHIBIT
 
 **CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF
2002**
 
 I,
Jeffrey D. Hoyal, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify
that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Raybor Management
Inc.;
 
 2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any 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 the period covered by this quarterly
report;
 
 3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
 
 4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 
 (a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
 
 (b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, 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
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to affect , the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):
 
 (a) all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’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 a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial
reporting.
 Date: May 20, 2005
    By:
    /s/ Jeffrey D. HoyalJeffrey D. HoyalChief Executive Officer
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 Annual Report of Park Bancorp, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2011 (the Report), the undersigned, hereby certifies, 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, 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 Company.



/S/    VICTOR E.
CAPUTOVictor E. Caputo Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary


March 31, 2011
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cytogen Corporation (the
"Company") for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Kevin J.
Bratton, Senior Vice President, Finance, and Chief Financial 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.





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.





Dated:
      March 14, 2008
            /s/
      Kevin J. BrattonKevin
      J. BrattonSenior
      Vice President, Finance, and Chief Financial
  Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10514

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

BENETH CASAS-AMADOR,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:15-CR-336-1

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Beneth Casas-Amador has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Casas-Amador has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently 

developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Casas-Amador’s claims of 

ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 9, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10514 Document: 00513869127 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/09/2017
No. 16-10514

2

without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 

841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Casas-Amador’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, Casas-Amador’s motion for the appointment of 

new counsel is DENIED, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, 

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS 

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-10514 Document: 00513869127 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/09/2017
#### Alfredo Cervantes Guitan MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27987.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 1, 1956.

*426•No appearance for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is the unlawful exhibition of lewd and lascivious motion pictures; the punishment, 30 days in jail and a fine of $200.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular, and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### Chester R. MORRIS, Appellant, v. Paul WHITE et al., Appellees.

No. 14295.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 27, 1964.

Chester R. Morris, in pro. per.

Waggoner Carr, Atty. Gen., Pat Bailey, Q. C. Taylor, Asst. Attys. Gen., Austin, for appellees.

*917POPE, Justice.

Plaintiff, Chester R. Morris, has appealed from a summary judgment. The basis for the judgment was res judicata, which may be presented by a motion for summary judgment. Gardner v. Martin, 162 Tex. 156, 345 S.W.2d 274. Defendants’ motion showed that the 53rd District Court of Travis County, on December 29, 1960, entered a summary judgment against Morris on the same action here asserted. The Supreme Court of Texas has declared that judgment a final one with respect to the University of Texas, the State of Texas, Arno Nowatny, Carl Bredt, deceased, and Paul White. University of Texas v. Morris, 163 Tex. 130, 352 S.W.2d 947. Notwithstanding that final judgment, Morris filed this action, the same one against the same parties, in Bexar County. The plea was properly sustained. Morris v. Johnson, Tex.Civ.App., 348 S.W.2d 228.

The judgment is affirmed.
Calendar No. 142

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 611

[Report No. 104–109]

A BILL

To authorize extension of time limitation for a

FERC-issued hydroelectric license.

JULY 11 (legislative day, JULY 10), 1995

Reported without amendment
II

Calendar No. 142

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 611

[Report No. 104–109]

To authorize extension of time limitation for a FERC-issued hydroelectric

license.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 24 (legislative day, MARCH 23), 1995

Mr. BRADLEY (for himself and Mr. LAUTENBERG) introduced the following

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and

Natural Resources

JULY 11 (legislative day, JULY 10), 1995

Reported by Mr. MURKOWSKI, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize extension of time limitation for a FERC-issued

hydroelectric license.

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

3 That notwithstanding the time limitation of section 13 of

4 the Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory

5 Commission, upon the request of the licensee for FERC

6 Project No. 9401 is authorized, in accordance with the
2

S 611 RS

1 good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements

2 of section 13 and the Commission’s procedures under such

3 section, to extend until August 3, 1999, the time required

4 for the licensee to commence the construction of such

5 project. This section shall take effect for the project upon

6 the expiration of the extension (issued by the Commission

7 under section 13) of the period required for commence8 ment of construction of such project.
#### Mat+tie WRIGHT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28110.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 29, 1956.

'No appearance for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*483DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is the possession of whisky, gin, and beer for the purpose of sale in a dry area, with punishment assessed at a fine of $200 and thirty days in jail.

The record contains no statement of facts.

Appellant’s objections to the trial court’s charge are not subject to the consideration of this court in the absence of a statement of facts.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### Frank E. ROCH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 36097.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 6, 1963.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally, James C. Brough and Lee P. Ward, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.

The appellant was jointly indicted with one Stinson for burglary of a house occupied and controlled by J. B. Hutchens. Stinson applied for severance and the appellant pleaded guilty before a jury and was assessed a term of 4 years in the penitentiary. He appeals from such conviction.

The evidence introduced by the state showed that J. B. Hutchens was manager of the Golf Shop at the Hermann Park Golf Course; that about 2:30 A.M. on January 12, 1961, the appellant and Stin-son were found in the shop which had been broken into by jimmying or forcing open an outside door of the building and the entrance door to the Golf Shop.

Mr. Hutchens testified that he was not acquainted with appellant or with Stinson and did not give either of them permission to break into the Golf Shop.

The only issue for the jury was that of punishment.

No evidence was offered which manifested or raised an issue as to the innocence of the appellant. On the other hand, the evidence supported appellant’s plea of guilty and showed his guilt as charged, and the court properly instructed the jury to find him guilty. Richardson v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 500, 300 S.W.2d 83, and authorities cited; and Gillies v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 346 S.W.2d 612, 88 A.L.R.2d 693.

No brief has been filed in appellant’s behalf.

No reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 24

                              POWER OF ATTORNEY
                              -----------------


      We, the undersigned, officers and directors of Parlex Corporation, 
hereby severally constitute Herbert W. Pollack and Steven M. Millstein, and 
each of them singly, our true and lawful attorneys, with full power 
indicated below, to sign for us the Report on Form 10-K of Parlex 
Corporation for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1997 and any required 
amendments thereto, hereby ratifying and confirming our signatures as they 
may be signed by our said attorneys to said Report and any and all such 
amendments.

      Witness our hands on the dates set forth below:



Dated: August 20, 1997


/s/ Sheldon A. Buckler
______________________________         Director
Sheldon A. Buckler


/s/ Richard W. Hale
______________________________         Director
Richard W. Hale



/s/ M. Joel Kosheff
______________________________         Director
M. Joel Kosheff



/s/ Peter J. Murphy
______________________________         Director
Peter J. Murphy



/s/ Lester Pollack
______________________________         Director
Lester Pollack



/s/ Herbert W. Pollack
______________________________         Director
Herbert W. Pollack



/s/ Benjamin Rabinovici
______________________________         Director
Benjamin Rabinovici
C. Options 1. All Amendments to Provide for and Encourage Electronic Reporting Are Included in CROMERRR Do not amend each Part of the CFR; address the electronic reporting and record-keeping issues only in CROMERRR. Include provisions in a CROMERRR to effectuate global revisions across allprograms. Theseprovisions should: Include in the CROMERRRa rule ofconstruction that allowselectronic reporting and record keeping in conformance with the CROMERRR wherever there is a reporting requirement in all 24 volumes ofthe CFR. Add provisions and definitions to CROMERRR that would effectuate a wholesale revision of terms and procedures in all 24 volumes of the regulations to include electronicrecordkeeping andreporting in conformance with the CROMERRR.

2. All Amendments Occurin Parts Other than CROMERRR

a. Amend Each Section, Subsection, and Appendix ofthe CFR that Contains Definitions, Procedures, and Instructions This is impractical; there were approximately 

### 100,000hits for words on our list. More efficient would be to amend at a Subpart orPart level. 

### b. Amend each Subpart in which there Are Electronic Reporting Requirements This approachispossible and is still aprodigious effort. There are approximately 

### 1600 Subparts in the CFR. Not all contain reporting requirements, yet even if wejust amend those Subpartsthat containreporting requirements; this is a lot ofamendments.

c. Amend each Part in which there Are Electronic Reporting Requirements This involves a more manageable number ofamendments; however, this is inflexible. A more flexible approach would be to adopt a hybrid where some amendments occur at the Part level and provisions are inserted in CROMERRR that would facilitate a transition to electronic reporting in all Parts.



# cI r 

### 3. Mixed Approach

## - SomeAmendmentsin CROMERRROtherAmendmentsin OtherParts 

### of CFR Amend Parts of the CFR 

### to state that electronic reporting in accordance with CROMERRRis encouraged. Amend the problematic definitions (they arerelatively few in number). Adopt a rule of construction for each Part for reporting requirements. The rule of construction should provide that provisions involving reporting can be construed as allowing electronic reporting in conformance with A rule of construction can help addressboth common usage and explicit definition issues. Add new definitionsboth in CROMERRR and in each Partthat make explicit that a laundry list of words (serve, transmit, submit, address, consent, certification, file, etc....) when used in connection with reporting they shall includeelectronicmeans in accordance with CROMERRR.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1308 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1308

  To amend the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act to extend the 
      termination date for the Commission, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 1, 2011

  Mr. Gallegly (for himself and Mr. Schock) introduced the following 
 bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 
                                 Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act to extend the 
      termination date for the Commission, 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. RONALD REAGAN CENTENNIAL COMMISSION ACT AMENDMENTS.

    (a) Final Report Due Date.--Section 7(c) of the Ronald Reagan 
Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 111-25; 36 U.S.C. 101 note prec.) 
is amended by striking ``April 30, 2011'' and inserting ``November 30, 
2011''.
    (b) Termination.--Section 8 of the Ronald Reagan Centennial 
Commission Act (Public Law 111-25; 36 U.S.C. 101 note prec.) is amended 
by striking ``May 30, 2011'' and inserting ``December 31, 2011''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

# AGENCY:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Aisha L. Wilkes, M.P.H., Scientific Review Officer, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway NE, Mailstop S106-9, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717. Telephone: (404) 639-6473; Email:                         *AWilkes@cdc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)—CE24-011, Grants to Support New Investigators in Conducting Research Related to Understanding Drug Use and Overdose Risk and Protective Factors (K01); Cancellation of Meeting; March 5, 2024, 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., EST., in the original                     **Federal Register**                     notice FRN. The web conference was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Tuesday, October 24, 2023, 88 FR 73020.                

This meeting is being canceled in its entirety.

                    The Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign                     **Federal Register**                     notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                

Kalwant Smagh,

Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2024-02208 Filed 2-2-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
May 19, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

COHEN ACQUISITION CORP., Appellant

NO. 14-14-00330-CV V.

EEPB, P.C., F/K/A EASLEY, ENDRES, PARKHILL & BRACKENDORFF, P.C., 

Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, EEPB, P.C., 

f/k/a Easley, Endres, Parkhill & Brackendorff, P.C., signed February 12, 2014, was 

heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no 

error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, Cohen Acquisition Corp., to pay all costs incurred in 

this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.