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

EXHIBIT 3.2

                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                           IMAGE SENSING SYSTEMS, INC.

         Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 302A.135, the
following amendment to the Restated Articles of Incorporation of Image Sensing
Systems, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, was approved and adopted:

         Section 1 of Article 3 of the Restated Articles of Incorporation of
Image Sensing Systems, Inc. is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows:

                  The total number of shares of capital stock which the
         corporation is authorized to issue shall be 25,000,000 shares,
         consisting of 20,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $.01 per
         share ("Common Stock"), and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par
         value $.01 per share ("Preferred Stock"). All shares of Common Stock of
         the Company outstanding as of the date of filing of these Restated
         Articles of Incorporation shall have a par value of $.01 per share.

         In addition, Article 1 of the Restated Articles is hereby restated in
its entirety as follows, solely to correct a typographical error in the Restated
Articles:

                  The name of the corporation is Image Sensing Systems, Inc.

         I swear that the foregoing is true and accurate and that I have the
authority to sign these Articles of Amendment on behalf of the Corporation.


Dated:  30 May, 2001


                                       IMAGE SENSING SYSTEMS, INC.

                                       By /s/ William L. Russell
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                William L. Russell
                                                Chairman & CEO
EXHIBIT C

Case 4:22-cv-00662-O Document 21-3 Filed 08/23/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID 135
ICC Case No. 26409/PAR

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER

THE RULES OF ARBITRATION OF THE

INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

GALDERMA SA

(Switzerland)

Claimant

v.

IPSEN BIOPHARM LTD

(United Kingdom)

IPSEN PHARMA SAS

(France)

and

IPSEN SA

(France)

Respondents

______________________________________

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

______________________________________

Kirkland & Ellis International LLP

30 St. Mary Axe

London EC3A 8AF

United Kingdom

NautaDutilh

Chaussée de la Hulpe 120

1000 Brussels

Belgium

Counsel for the Claimant

28 February 2022

Case 4:22-cv-00662-O Document 21-3 Filed 08/23/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID 136
22

70. The term “Affiliates” is defined by reference to the Distribution and Development 

Agreement entered into between Ipsen Ltd. and Galderma Pharma SA on or around 

9 February 2007 (the “Europe DDA”),93 which provides that “Affiliate”:

“means, in relation to any party, any person, corporation or entity which 

directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by or under common control with 

such party. Control shall be deemed to exist if a party beneficially owns more 

than 50% of the share capital and/or of the voting rights of such a person, 

corporation or entity. An Affiliate shall not be considered a Third party under 

this Agreement.”

94

 

Case 4:22-cv-00662-O Document 21-3 Filed 08/23/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID 137
Case 4:22-cv-00662-O Document 21-3 Filed 08/23/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID 138
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. JI A N D O N G M A I, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 09- 50474 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 7 - c r - 0 1 2 2 0 - PSG ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia P hi l i p S . G ut i e rr e z , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e bruary15, 2011 ** B e f o r e : C A N B Y , F E RN A N D E Z , an dM . S M I T H , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . J ian D o n g M a i ap p e a ls f r o m th e 4 6 - m o n th s e n te n c e im p o s e df o llo w in g h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n f o rd is tr ib u tio n o f

an dp o s s e s s io n w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te k e ta m in e , in v io la tio n o f 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) an d8 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( D ) . P u r s u an t to A n de rs v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , M a i ’ s c ouns e l ha s f i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng 

# FI LED MA R 08 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 50474 2 the r e ar e no gr ounds f

orr e l i e f , a l ong w i th am ot i on t o w i thdr aw a s c ouns e l of reco rd . W e h av e p ro v i d edth e ap p el l an tw i th th e o p p o rtu n i ty t o fi l e a p ro se supp l em ent albri ef

. N o p ro se supp l em ent albri ef or answ er i ng bri ef

has bee n f i l e d. O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o ar g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. W e d is m is s in lig h t o f

th e v a lidap p e a l w a iv e r . See U ni ted States v. N

gu ye n , 235 F . 3d 11 79 , 11 82 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). C o u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s GR AN T E D. DI S MI S S E D.
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 This
Amendment to Employment Agreement shall be effective as of August 31, 2015 by and between Entravision Communications Corporation (the “Company”) and Mario M. Carrera (the “Executive”). 

The Company and the Executive entered into an Executive Employment Agreement effective as of September 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”), and the
parties wish to amend the Agreement to align the term of the Agreement to be on a calendar-year basis. For and in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

 

	1.	Effective on the date hereof, Section 2 of the Agreement is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 


“2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period beginning on the Effective Date until December 31, 2015, or until
such time that the Executive’s employment is terminated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (the term of such employment, the “Employment Term”).” 

 

	2.	In all other respects, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

  

	3.	This Amendment may be executed in counterparts and exchanged by facsimile, e-mail or other electronic form, with the same legal effect as if all signatures had appeared in original handwriting on the same physical
document. 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment on the date and year first above written. 

 

			
	ENTRAVISION COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	/s/ Walter F. Ulloa
	Name:	 	Walter F. Ulloa
	Title:	 	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
	
	EXECUTIVE
		
	 	 	/s/ Mario M. Carrera
	Name:	 	Mario M. Carrera
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

VS. § CASE 4:22-CR-00034-O-6

§

LAURA ORTIZ §

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Now comes LAURA ORTIZ, by and through counsel of record, and makes 

this Motion to Continue Sentencing. In support hereof the Defendant would 

show the Court the following:

1. Defendant entered a plea on February 15, 2022 and sentencing in this 

matter is scheduled for June 17, 2022.

2. The Presentence Report in this matter was filed under seal on April 26, 

2022. Counsel has discussed the Presentence Report with the Defendant; 

however, additional time is needed to gather further relevant sentencing 

information on behalf of the Defendant. 

3. Counsel is requesting an extension of time to file objections to the 

presentence report. 

4. The undersigned counsel has contacted counsel for the Government, 

P.J. Meitl and he is not opposed to this continuance. The defendant is aware of 

this Motion and has no objection to a continuance. 

Case 4:22-cr-00034-O Document 277 Filed 06/15/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 1298
5. This Motion is not made for delay but in the interest of justice. 

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, the defendant respectfully 

requests this Honorable Court continue the sentencing date in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

JAY S. NORTON

LaHood Norton Law Group

40 NE Loop 410, Suite 525

San Antonio, Texas 78216

jay@lahoodnorton.com

210-797-7700

210-530-1525

TBN: 15105800

Certificate of Service

This is to certify that on June 15, 2022, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

pleading was electronically filed via the CM/ECF System with service sent by 

email to AUSA PJ Meitl.

JAY S. NORTON

Case 4:22-cr-00034-O Document 277 Filed 06/15/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 1299
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

VS. § CASE 4:22-CR-00034-O-6

§

LAURA ORTIZ §

ORDER

After due consideration, the Motion to Sentencing is in all things granted. 

The sentencing in this matter shall be moved to a date in the future.

DATE JUDGE PRESIDING

Case 4:22-cr-00034-O Document 277 Filed 06/15/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 1300
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, James Murdakes, certify that:

| | 1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Image Sensing Systems, Inc.;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.             Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 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 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 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 materially 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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(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 control over financial reporting.

Date:  August 9, 2006



| |  | /s/ James Murdakes                                
| |  | --------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name: James MurdakesTitle: Chief Executive Officer

---
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 311

Designating October 1994 as ‘‘National Breast Cancer Awareness Month’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 1, 1994

Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating October 1994 as ‘‘National Breast Cancer

Awareness Month’’.

Whereas breast cancer will strike an estimated 182,000

women and 1,000 men in the United States in 1994;

Whereas the risk of developing breast cancer increases as a

woman grows older;

Whereas breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer

death in women, and will kill an estimated 46,000 women

and 300 men in 1994;

Whereas the 5-year survival rate for localized breast cancer

has risen from 78 percent in the 1940’s to over 90 percent today;
2

•HJ 311 IH

Whereas most breast cancers are detected by the woman herself;

Whereas educating both the public and health care providers

about the importance of early detection will result in reducing breast cancer mortality;

Whereas appropriate use of screening mammography, in conjunction with clinical examination and breast self-examination, can result in the detection of many breast cancers early in their development and increase the survival

rate to nearly 100 percent;

Whereas data from controlled trials clearly demonstrate that

deaths from breast cancer are significantly reduced in

women who have been screened by mammography;

Whereas many women are reluctant to have screening mammograms for a variety of reasons such as the cost of testing, lack of information, and fear;

Whereas access to screening mammography is directly related

to socioeconomic status;

Whereas increased awareness about the importance of screening mammography will result in the procedure being regularly requested by the patient and recommended by the

health care provider; and

Whereas it is projected that more women will use this lifesaving test as it becomes increasingly available and affordable: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That October 1994 is designated as ‘‘National Breast

4 Cancer Awareness Month’’, and the President is author-
3

•HJ 311 IH

1 ized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon

2 the people of the United States to observe the month with

3 appropriate programs and activities.

Æ
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 27, 2016

s0919 

# Order

Clerk September 27, 2016

152028

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 152028

COA: 324584

Mecosta CC: 07

- 006086

- FC

TROY MICHAEL GUZIKOWSKI,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 14, 2015 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of

People v Comer (Docket No. 152713) is pending on appeal before this Court and that th e

decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to

appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in

that case.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

ROSABLANCA MONIQUE HAYES, §

 Petitioner, §

§

v. § No. 3:22-cv-1641-B (BT) 

§

DALLAS COUNTY JAIL, et al.,

 Respondents.

§

§

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this case and the

Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge dated September

12, 2022, the Court finds that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are

correct, and they are accepted as the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation

of the United States Magistrate Judge are accepted. Moreover, considering the record in this case,

the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court adopts and incorporates by reference

the Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation filed in this case in support of

its finding that Petitioner has failed to show (1) that reasonable jurists would find this Court's

“assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2) that reasonable jurists would find

“it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” and

“debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000).

Case 3:22-cv-01641-B-BT Document 14 Filed 09/27/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 44
2

If Petitioner files a notice of appeal, she must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit

a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

SO ORDERED this 27 day of September, 2022. th

_________________________________

JANE J. BOYLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 3:22-cv-01641-B-BT Document 14 Filed 09/27/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 45
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 301

Designating May 1994 as ‘‘National Sporting Goods Month’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 22, 1993

Mr. CRANE introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating May 1994 as ‘‘National Sporting Goods Month’’.

Whereas a program of regular exercise and good nutrition

has been shown to be the best prescription to a longer

and healthier life;

Whereas more than 22,000 sporting goods retailers and more

than 3,000 manufacturers and sales agents promote good

health and fitness through participation in sports activities;

Whereas millions of Americans participate in sports activities

each year;
2

•HJ 301 IH

Whereas 6 of the 10 most popular sports activities as surveyed annually by the National Sporting Goods Association are fitness related activities;

Whereas more Americans of all ages are participating in a

regular exercise program;

Whereas the National Sporting Goods Association has served

sporting goods retailers, manufacturers, and sales agents

on a not-for-profit basis; and

Whereas for 65 years the sporting goods industry, with the

National Sporting Goods Association, has promoted good

fitness as a way of life: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That May 1994 is designated as ‘‘National Sporting

4 Goods Month’’, and the President is authorized and re5 quested to issue a proclamation calling on the people of

6 the United States to observe that month with appropriate

7 ceremonies and activities.

Æ
## Ex-parte Meeting Summary

DATE: April 07, 2008 SUBJECT: Static Inverter SNPRM 2002-NM-12-AD MEETING MEMBER: Phil Forde, Samuel Slentz, Binh Tran, George Roussos (SACO) Marlene Nelson, Joseph Cooledge, John Murphy (Boeing) DISCUSSION: Boeing made comments toexclude the models 747 and 777 from SNPRM 2002-NM-12- AD applicability. We met with Boeing todiscuss the data that they have to support their position forthe 747 and 777. Their position was that the units have no significant service history problem onthe models mentioned and the exposure is low on these models because ofthe limited times the static inverter isused on these models. We expressed our position that the static inverter is subject tothe same failure mode on these models but that the exposure isreduced because ofthe limited times ofoperation. CONCLUSION: Weextended the compliance time on these models due to the reduced risk resulting from the limited exposure. We changed the compliance time for747 and 777 from 42 months to 60months as noted inthe response tothe comments.

I'REPARED BY: Binh Tran ,ANM-130S. Phone: (425) 917-6485
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2966]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-42377; File No. SR-Phlx-99-24]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed 
Rule Change by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. Relating to the 
Establishment of a Fee to Members for Receiving On-Line Options 
Information

February 2, 2000.
    On June 29, 1999, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' 
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 
thereunder,\2\ to adopt a fee for the transmission to members of option 
trade information on a real-time trade basis. Notice of the proposed 
rule change was published on August 12, 1999, in the Federal Register, 
to solicit comments from interested persons.\3\ On December 28, 1999, 
the Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41711 (August 5, 1999), 
64 FR 44073.
    \4\ See Letter from John Dayton, Counsel, Phlx, to Nancy Sanow, 
Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, SEC, dated 
December 23, 1999.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-2966 Filed 2-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
Draft Agenda LV Meeting October 13-14, 2011

NRECA Hosting

Overview of Issues Raised for Engineering Analysis

 Requests for Data

o Core Weight vs Efficiency

o Total Weight vs Efficiency

o Engineering Data Template fo r Bidirectional Data Exchange

o Tool for examining effects of varying steel scenarios

o Simplified Cost/Efficiency Charts

 Changes to Analysis

o Representative Units

o Scaling

 Adjusting at extremes of kVA ranges

 1/3 Phase Equivalency

o Expansion of Scope

 kVA range

 Current Exemptions

o Space Constrained Units

 Open-Ended Questions

o How were CSLs and ELs chosen?

o Compliance of Transformers with Active Cooling

o Compliance of Transformers with Multiple BIL ratings

o Compliance of Transformers with Multiple Primaries/Secondaries