alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



Exhibit 10.1.1
 iPass Inc.  2003 Equity Incentive Plan
 Stock Option Grant Notice  (Special Change of Control Vesting Provisions)
 iPass Inc.
 Optionholder:Date of Grant:Vesting Commencement Date:Number of Shares Subject to Option:Exercise Price (Per Share):Total Exercise Price:Expiration Date:
 Type of Grant:
    
    o     Nonstatutory Stock OptionExercise Schedule:
    
    o     Same as Vesting Schedule                ̈     Early Exercise PermittedVesting Schedule:
    
    [insert vesting schedule]; provided, however, that if within eighteen (18) months following the closing of a Corporate
Transaction, (i) your employment by the Company, or an affiliate of the Company, is terminated by the Company without
Cause or (ii) if you resign your employment for Good Reason, then all of your then outstanding unvested shares
underlying this option shall vest in full upon the date of such termination (the Change of Control Provisions).For purposes of this option:Cause shall mean the occurrence of any of the following (and only the
following): your conviction of any felony involving fraud or act of dishonesty
against the Company or its parent corporation or subsidiary corporation (whether
now or hereafter existing, as those terms are defined in Sections 424(e) and
(f), respectively, of the Internal Revenue Code (Affiliates)); (ii) your
conduct which, based upon good faith and reasonable factual investigation and
determination of the Board of Directors of the Company, demonstrates gross
unfitness to serve; or (iii) your intentional, material violation of any
statutory or fiduciary duty you have to the Company or its Affiliates;Corporate Transaction shall mean (i) the sale of all or substantially all of
the assets of the Company or (ii) a merger of the Company with or into another
entity in which the stockholders of the Company immediately prior to the closing
of the transaction own less than a majority of the ownership interest of the
Company immediately following such closing. For purposes of determining whether
the stockholders of the Company prior to the occurrence of a transaction
described above own less than fifty percent (50%) of the voting securities of
the relevant entity afterwards, only the lesser of the voting power held by a
person either before or after the transaction shall be counted in determining
that persons ownership afterwards; and




---



##### 



Good Reason shall mean your resignation of your employment because (i) the
Company requires that you relocate to a worksite that is more than 60 miles from
its current principal executive office, unless you agree in writing to such
relocation; or (ii) the Company reduces your monthly salary below the gross rate
of the then-existing rate at the time of the closing of the Corporate
Transaction, unless you agree in writing to such reduction.Payment:
    
    By one or a combination of the following items (described in the Stock Option Agreement):
 
 Additional Terms/Acknowledgements:
  Other Agreements:
 iPass Inc.
    
    Optionholder:By:Signature
    
    
    
    SignatureTitle:
    
    
    
    Date:Date:
 Attachments
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                 9
<MULTIPLIER>                          1,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                               11,847
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                1,061
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                          0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>         202,468
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                    0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                      0
<LOANS>                             525,970
<ALLOWANCE>                           7,161
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      774,465
<DEPOSITS>                          429,353
<SHORT-TERM>                        194,640
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                  13,095
<LONG-TERM>                          86,648
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                                 72
<OTHER-SE>                           50,657
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>      774,465
<INTEREST-LOAN>                      11,998
<INTEREST-INVEST>                     3,499
<INTEREST-OTHER>                        158
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                     15,655
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                    4,755
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    9,445
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                 6,210
<LOAN-LOSSES>                          (150)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                       30
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                       4,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       3,478
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                          2,217
<EPS-BASIC>                             .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                           .30
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                         8.61
<LOANS-NON>                           4,729
<LOANS-PAST>                              0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                          0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                           0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                      7,064
<CHARGE-OFFS>                           187
<RECOVERIES>                             14
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                     7,161
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                  7,161
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                       0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                   0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DREW HOWARD BRINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-92-387, CA-97-1880-6-5) Submitted: May 28, 1998 Decided: June 10, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Drew Howard Brinson, Appellant Pro Se. Terry L. Wooten, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Drew Howard Brinson seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court'sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Brinson , Nos. CR-92-387,CA-97-1880-6-5 (D.S.C. Dec. 8, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

LAUREN MORENO a/k/a LAUREN EHRLICH

, Appellant,

v.

HOWARD S. EHRLICH

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 1518

[ August 12, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Tarlika Navarro , Judge; L.T. Case No. 07

- 12450 FMCE

.

Bart A. Houston of The Houston Firm, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for

appellant.

Stuart N. House of Stuart N. House, P.A., Coral Springs, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

C IKLIN

, G ERBER and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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  REGARDING THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K  FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010

In connection with the Annual Report of Heritage Commerce Corp (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawrence D. McGovern, 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:



March 4, 2011

/s/ LAWRENCE D. MCGOVERN Lawrence D. McGovern Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000936301
<NAME> U. S. TRUST CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                          152600
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            1230
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     812025
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        1392942
<ALLOWANCE>                                      16862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2599898
<DEPOSITS>                                     1949147
<SHORT-TERM>                                    213348
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             238688
<LONG-TERM>                                      19434
<COMMON>                                          9739
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      169542
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 2599898
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  81836
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                39205
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 29266
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                150307
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               56727
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               69538
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            80769
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     1200
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                4188
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 421656
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (109458)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    (109458)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (59667)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (6.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (6.21)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.82
<LOANS-NON>                                       9456
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 14699
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     1947
<RECOVERIES>                                      2910
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                16862
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             16862
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          16862
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED FUEL GAS COMPANY v. Maurice HIENEMAN, and Opal Hieneman, His Wife, and Mollie Hieneman.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 12, 1954.

J. K. Wells, Paintsville, for appellant.

Thomas E. Nickel and Oscar Sammons, Greenup, for appellees.

* MOREMEN, Judge.

The appellant instituted this action to condemn a right of way 269 feet in length, comprising 0.43 acres, across a part of ap-pellees’ 35 acre tract of land in Greenup *815County for a pipe line easement. The right of w;ays. for othér portions of this pipe line were involved in United Fuel Gas Co. v. Mauk, 272 S.W.2d 810, and United Fuel Gas Co. v. Hieneman, 272 S.W.2d 813.

The award of $145 by the commissioners fpr the easement area was, on appeal, increased by a judgment of the Greenup Circuit Court to $800 — $300 for the easement area and $500 resulting damages to the remainder of the tract. As in the previous cases, this case was tried with the damages being the sole question.

The facts are essentially the same and the questions involved herein are almost identical with those involved in the two above cited cases.

Therefore, for the reasons given in, and upon the authority of, United Fuel Gas Company v. Mauk, 272 S.W.2d 810, and United Fuel Gas Company v. Heineman, 272 S.W.2d 813, the motion for an appeal is granted and the judgment is reversed.
EXHIBIT 11.1

                                INTERCARDIA, INC.

                STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                  (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                                    Three Months Ended
                                                                                       December 31,
                                                                            ------------------------------------
                                                                                  1996               1995
                                                                           ------------------  -----------------
<S>                                                                          <C>                 <C>           
Net Income per Unaudited Consolidated Statements
     of Operations                                                           $         1,222     $        3,491
                                                                           ==================  =================

Calculation of Weighted Average Number of Common
      Shares and Common Share Equivalents:
           Common Stock                                                            6,739,657          3,500,000
           Series A Preferred Stock                                                        -            692,621 (1)
           Stock Options and Warrants                                                764,772            681,826 (2)
                                                                           ------------------  -----------------
                                                                                   7,504,429          4,874,447
                                                                           ==================  =================
Net Income per Common Share                                                  $          0.16     $         0.72
                                                                           ==================  =================

</TABLE>


--------------
(1)      All of the Series A Preferred shares were issued within one year of the
         initial filing date of Intercardia's initial public offering and are
         therefore treated as outstanding in accordance with Staff Accounting
         Bulletin Topic 4-D.

(2)      Includes stock options and warrants granted within one year of the
         initial filing date of Intercardia's initial public offering, which are
         treated as outstanding in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin
         Topic 4-D. The amount is net of 60,882 shares that would be repurchased
         under the treasury stock method.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM S.D. WARREN
COMPANY'S (THE "COMPANY") CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE QUARTER
ENDED DECEMBER 29, 1999 AND BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 29, 1999 FOUND ON
PAGE 4 AND 5, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1999
<CASH>                                          65,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   71,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,900
<INVENTORY>                                    191,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               390,300
<PP&E>                                       1,350,200
<DEPRECIATION>                                 385,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,492,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          259,100
<BONDS>                                        558,600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     321,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,492,300
<SALES>                                        361,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               361,800
<CGS>                                          288,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  326,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,200
<EPS-BASIC>                                      $0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.13


</TABLE>
#### THOMPSON v. STATE.

No. 22807.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 12, 1944.

*558Chas. Roach and Grady Sturgeon, both of Paris, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for selling whisky in a dry area. The punishment assessed is a fine of $100.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. All matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
(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 Trust.
 MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST IVBy:
    /s/ MARLENE DEBELName:
    Marlene Debel*Title:
    Regular Trustee  
 *
    
    Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of the Trust for purposes of Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
EXHIBIT 99.3
                 Management Assertion for Certificste Series C-1

<PAGE>
                              MANAGEMENT ASSERTION

As of and for the year ended December 31, 1997, CRIIMI MAE Services
Limited
Partnership has complied with the minimum servicing standards set forth
in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single
Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers.  As of and for this same
period, CRIIMI MAE Services Limited Partnership had in effect a fidelity
bond and errors and omissions policy in the amount of $20 million.


/S/Vicki Speights
Vicki Speights
Vice President, Mortgage Servicing
February' 27, 1998

/s/Brian Hanson
Brian Hanson
Group Vice President
February 27, 1998

/s/Cynthia O. Azzara
Cynthia O. Azzara
Senior Vice President and Chief
 Financial Officer

/s/Dawn K. Bowman
Dawn E. Bowman
Vice President/Controller
February 27, 1998
Exhibit 99.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     of Title 18 Of The United States Code
                     -------------------------------------


I, Jonathan P. Ward, the Chief Executive Officer of The ServiceMaster Company,
certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such
Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of The ServiceMaster Company.




                                                        /S/ Jonathan P. Ward
                                                        ---------------------
                                                        Jonathan P. Ward
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                                        March 31, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The ServiceMaster Company and will be retained by The ServiceMaster
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3027 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 442 Miller Valley Road in Prescott, Arizona, 

as the ‘‘Barry M. Goldwater Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3027 EH

1 SECTION 1. BARRY M. GOLDWATER POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 442 Miller Valley Road in Pres4 cott, Arizona, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Barry M. Goldwater Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Barry M. Goldwater 

10 Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3027 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. Prescott, Arizona, as the ‘‘Barry M. Goldwater al Service located at 442 Miller Valley Road in
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 209 (Friday, October 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64420]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27683]


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

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED


Proposed Additions Procurement List; Correction

    In the document appearing on page 51794, FR Doc 00-21810, in the 
issue of August 25, 2000, in the second column the Committee published 
a proposed addition for Vegetable Oil. From comments that were 
received, the Committee realized that the requirement that was being 
proposed for addition to the Procurement List was open to several 
interpretations. The Committee then published a document appearing on 
page 60903, FR Doc 00-26361, in the issue of October 13, 2000, in the 
second column another proposed addition for Vegetable Oil. This notice 
of October 13, 2000 should have indicated that it was replacing the 
proposed addition of August 25, 2000. To clarify, the Committee is 
proposing to add an additional 5% of the government requirement for 
Vegetable Oil. If added, this will increase the requirement on the 
Procurement List from 15% to 20%.

Louis R. Bartalot,
Deputy Director (Operations).
[FR Doc. 00-27683 Filed 10-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P