alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2







AGREEMENT AMENDMENT


 


THIS AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (“AMENDMENT”), is made and entered into by and between Sharps Compliance Corp., having its principle office at 9220 Kirby Drive, Suite 500, Houston, TX 77054 (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”), and Diana P. Diaz (hereinafter referred to as the “Executive”).


 


WITNESSETH


 


For and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and Executive agree to amend the AGREEMENT between the Company and the Executive dated June 9, 2010 and amended on, (i) December 2, 2011 (effective November 17, 2011) and (ii) March 6, 2012 (effective March 1, 2012), herein defined as the “Agreement”, as follows:


 


The Base Salary referred to in the Agreement of $7,307.69 per pay period (twenty-six pay periods per year) is hereby changed to $8,269.23.


 


IN WITNESSETH WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year first written below with the amended provisions noted above being effective September 10, 2015.







	 	
EXECUTIVE:


	 	 
	 	
By:

	
/s/ Diana P. Diaz


	 	
Executive


	 	 
	 	
Date:

	
September 10, 2015


	 	 	 
	 	
COMPANY:


	 	 
	 	
By:

	
/s/ David P. Tusa


	 	
Name:

	
David P. Tusa


	 	 	 
	 	
Title:

	
Chief Executive Officer and President


	 	 	 
	 	
Date:

	
September 10, 2015
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

BRAYLON RAY COULTER,

#58976-177,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHIEF JUDGE LYNN, et al.,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 3:22-CV-1384-X-BT

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a 

recommendation in this case. [Doc. No. 22]. No objections were filed. The District 

Court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain 

error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of February 2023.

____________________________________

BRANTLEY STARR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-01384-X-BT Document 24 Filed 02/14/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 233
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 31 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 31

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
           limit the terms of office for Members of Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

   Mr. Hancock introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
           limit the terms of office for Members of Congress.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article --

    ``Section  1. No person may serve any portion of a term as 
Representative if, taking into account only service on or after the 
date on which this section takes effect, at the completion of that term 
the person would have served as a Representative for more than four 
full terms (not including any part of a partial term to which the 
person may have been elected or appointed).
    ``Section 2. No person may serve any portion of a term as Senator 
if, taking into account only service on or after the date on which this 
section takes effect, at the completion of that term the person would 
have served as a Senator for more than two full terms (not including 
any part of a partial term to which the person may have been elected or 
appointed).
    ``Section 3. This article shall take effect at noon of the first 
January 3 that occurs more than one year after the date of adoption of 
this article and on which terms of Representatives begin.''.

                                 <all>
```
Case 3:22-cr-00310-L Document 20 Filed 08/29/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 30
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Somsak Chivavibul,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period
covered by this report on Form 10-K of Navient Student Loan Trust 2015-3 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my
knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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 to the period covered by this report;

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

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement and administration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as indenture trustee.

[Signature Page Follows]



---

|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|Date: March 30, 2016                 
|                                     
|/s/ SOMSAK CHIVAVIBUL                
|Somsak Chivavibul                    
|President and Chief Financial Officer
|(Senior Securitization Officer)      
|Navient Funding, LLC
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ron Hedges, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered September 13, 1989, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

At the suppression hearing, two police officers testified that as they entered a bar someone yelled, "Five-O”. They then saw the defendant drop six plastic bags which appeared to contain crack cocaine. They arrested the defendant and *571brought him to the station house where a search of his coat pocket disclosed an additional nine bags, which also appeared to contain crack cocaine. Based upon the officers’ testimony, which the hearing court found to be credible, it was properly determined that the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant *(see, People v McRay,*51 NY2d 594; *People v Toussaint,*133 AD2d 869; *People v Stokes,*57 AD2d 797). Once the defendant was arrested, the officers were justified in conducting a search of his clothing *(see, People v Gonzalez,*62 NY2d 386; *People v Toussaint, supra).*Accordingly, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress the evidence was properly denied.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 82 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 82

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the Greater Washington 
                            Soap Box Derby.






103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 82

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Association (hereinafter in 
this resolution referred to as the ``Association'') shall be permitted 
to sponsor a public event, soap box derby races, on the Capitol grounds 
on July 17, 1993, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate may jointly 
designate.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

    The event to be carried out under this resolution shall be free of 
admission charge to the public and arranged not to interfere with the 
needs of Congress, under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board; except that the 
Association shall assume full responsibility for all expenses and 
liabilities incident to all activities associated with the event.

SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

    For the purposes of this resolution, the Association is authorized 
to erect upon the Capitol grounds, subject to the approval of the 
Architect of the Capitol, such stage, sound amplification devices, and 
other related structures and equipment as may be required for the event 
to be carried out under this resolution.

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

    The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are 
authorized to make any such additional arrangements that may be 
required to carry out the event under this resolution.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 4, 1993.

            Attest:






                                                                 Clerk.`
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Lela L. Harris, Respondent, v Syracuse University, Appellant. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

Mercure, J.

Appeals (1) from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 7, 1989, as amended by decision filed October 20, 1989, which ruled that claimant did not make a false statement for the purpose of obtaining workers’ compensation benefits, and (2) from a decision of said Board, filed April 18, 1990, which adhered to a prior decision awarding claimant workers’ compensation benefits.

Claimant commenced employment with Syracuse University (hereinafter the employer) in August 1986. In connection therewith, she completed a written health statement on which she failed to disclose her preexisting multiple sclerosis. In March 1987, claimant made application for and the self-insured employer began to pay disability benefits. However, in May 1987 the employer rejected the claim upon the ground that claimant falsely responded to questions on the preemployment health statement and that such false responses rendered her ineligible for disability benefits pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 220 (6), which provides: "any person who for the purpose of obtaining any benefit or payment under [Workers’ Compensation Law article 9] or for the purpose of influencing any determination regarding any ben*792efit payment, knowingly makes a false statement with regard to a material fact, shall not be entitled to receive benefits with respect to the disability claimed”. Claimant applied to the Workers’ Compensation Board for review of the employer’s denial of benefits and, ultimately, the Board decided that claimant was not precluded from receiving disability benefits in the absence of evidence in the record establishing that claimant made a false statement for the specific purpose of obtaining disability benefits. The employer appeals.

There should be an affirmance. In our view, the Board interpreted Workers’ Compensation Law § 220 (6) in a reasonable manner, in accordance with the clear legislative intent *(see, Matter of Howe v New York State Dept. of Corrections,*141 AD2d 993, *lv denied*73 NY2d 705) and the humanitarian purpose of Workers’ Compensation Law article 9 *(see, Matter of Kallir v Friendly Ice Cream,*93 AD2d 246, 247, *lv denied*60 NY2d 554). In contrast, the employer’s contention that a statement made in an effort to obtain employment is, of necessity, made in an effort to obtain all benefits of that employment, including disability benefits, defies logic, particularly in view of the fact that Workers’ Compensation Law § 220 (6), a penal statute, must be construed narrowly *(see,*McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes §§ 271, 273). Moreover, we agree with the Board that claimant was under no compulsion to respond to any inquiry about her medical condition which was not based upon a bona fide occupational qualification *(see,*Executive Law § 296 [1] [d]; *State Div. of Human Rights v Xerox Corp.,*65 NY2d 213, 218).

Decisions affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Kane, J. P., Casey, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.
---

EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT


TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Taitron Components Incorporated (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, 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 operations of the Company.





Date:  May 15, 2009


/s/ Stewart WangStewart WangChief Executive Officer and President(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ David VanderhorstDavid VanderhorstChief Financial Officer and Secretary(Principal Financial Officer)
Exhibit 31.2

 

 

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANTTOSECTION 302**

**OFTHESARBANES-OXLEYACT**

 

I, Terry L. Stevens, certify that: 

 

|   | 1. | I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Highwoods Realty Limited Partnership; |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 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 to 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; |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Date: March 12, 2008

 

| /s/ TERRYL.STEVENS                                                                       |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Terry L. StevensSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner |   |

 

| * | Paragraphs 4 and 5, omitted here, are included in Exhibit 31.1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed by Highwoods Realty Limited Partnership on August 14, 2007. |
|---|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 22 September 2005

in Case C-221/03: Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 91/676/EEC - Incomplete transposition - Protection of water against pollution by nitrates from agricultural sources - Failure to identify waters that are or could be affected by pollution - Incorrect and inadequate designation of vulnerable zones - Code of good agricultural practice - Inadequacies - Action programme - Inadequacies and incomplete application)

(2005/C 296/02)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-221/03, Commission of the European Communities (Agents: G. Valero Jordana, assisted by M. van der Woude and T. Chellingsworth) v Kingdom of Belgium (Agent: A. Snoecx, and subsequently by E. Dominkovits,) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 22 May 2003 — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, A. Borg Barthet, S. von Bahr, J. Malenovský and A. Ó Caoimh (Rapporteur), Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 22 September 2005, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 171, 19.07.2003.

----
Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of the meeting of the Drug Testing Advisory Board of the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention in March 2000. 

The Drug Testing Advisory Board meeting will be open from 8:30 a.m. until 10:15 a.m. on March 13, 2000. The open session will include a roll call, an HHS update, a DOT update, and a brief review of alternative specimen testing. A public comment period will be scheduled during the open session. If anyone needs special accommodations for persons with disabilities please notify the Contact listed below. 

The Drug Testing Advisory Board meeting will be closed from 10:15 a.m. on March 13, 2000, until 3:30 p.m. on March 14, 2000, because it involves the review of sensitive National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) internal operating procedures and program development issues. Therefore, this portion of the meeting will be closed to the public as determined by the Administrator, SAMHSA, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (4), and (6) and 5 U.S.C. App.2, § 10(d). 

An agenda for the open session of this meeting and a roster of board members may be obtained from: Mrs. Giselle Hersh, Division of Workplace Programs, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockwall II, Suite 815, Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone: (301) 443-6014. 

Substantive program information may be obtained from the contact whose name and telephone number is listed below. 

*Committee Name:*                    Drug Testing Advisory Board                 

*Meeting Date:*                    March 13-14, 2000                 

*Place:*                    Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815                 

*Open:*                    March 13, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-10:15 a.m.                 

*Closed:*                    March 13, 2000; 10:15 a.m.-4:30 p.m.                 

*Closed:*                    March 14, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-3:30 p.m.                 

*Contact:*                    Donna M. Bush, PhD., Executive Secretary, Telephone: (301) 443-6014 and FAX: (301) 443-3031.                 

Dated: February 2, 2000.

Toian Vaughn,

Committee Management Officer, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 

[FR Doc. 00-2981 Filed 2-8-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
Exhibit 4.2

                                 FIRST AMENDMENT

                                       TO

                          EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN

                                       OF

                             FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.

         THIS AMENDMENT is adopted this 19th day of July, 1995, to be effective
April 1, 1995, by Frontier Airlines, Inc., a Colorado corporation ("Frontier").

                                    RECITALS:

1.       Effective as of April 1, 1994, Frontier adopted the Employee Stock
Ownership Plan of Frontier Airlines, Inc. (the "Plan").

2.       Pursuant to Section 9.4 of the Plan, Frontier reserved the right and
power to amend the Plan from time to time. Pursuant to that right and power, the
Plan is hereby amended as set forth below:

                                   AMENDMENTS

1.       Section 1.36 is amended in its entirety to provide as follows:

         "Plan Year" means the 12-month period on which the records of the Plan
         are kept. The first Plan Year of the Plan is the period from April 1,
         1994 through March 31, 1995. The second Plan Year of the Plan shall be
         the short period from April 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995. The Plan
         Year of the Plan thereafter shall be the calendar year. The short Plan
         Year in 1995 shall be treated as a full Plan Year for all purposes of
         the Plan, but for purposes of such calculations as the Limitation Year
         and for purposes of computing any restrictions or limitations with
         respect to the Plan Year, all such restrictions and limitations shall
         be prorated to reflect the short Plan Year."

2.       Subsection 1.44(a) is hereby amended by the addition thereto, at the
         end of the following:

         "The short Plan Year from April 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995 shall
         constitute a Year of Service, but the number of Hours of Service
         required during that Plan Year shall be prorated."

3.       Subsection 5.1(a) is hereby amended by the addition, at the end, of the
         following:

         "Notwithstanding the foregoing, all Participants who shared in the
         allocation of the Company Contribution for the Plan Year ended March
         31, 1995 shall be 100% vested in such Company Contribution."
<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment has been executed as of the
date first written above.

                                              FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.


                                              By:  /s/ Samuel D. Addoms
Case 5:22-cr-00070-H-BQ Document 48 Filed 01/04/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID 88
Case 5:22-cr-00070-H-BQ Document 48 Filed 01/04/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID 89
Case 5:22-cr-00070-H-BQ Document 48 Filed 01/04/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID 90