alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.8(b)

                               SECURITY AGREEMENT

This SECURITY AGREEMENT is made on this 24th day of October, 2004, between Linea
Aqua, LLC ("Debtor"), and Lorcom, Inc. ("Secured Party").

1.    SECURITY INTEREST. Debtor grants to Secured Party a security interest in
      all inventory hereafter placed upon the premises known as Linea Aqua,
      located at 2216 Hamilton Blvd., South Plainfield, New Jersey 07080 (the
      "premises") or used in connection therewith and in which Debtor hereafter
      acquires any right and the proceeds therefrom. The Security Interest shall
      secure the payment and performance of Debtor's promissory note of even
      date herewith in the principal amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
      ($500,000).

2.    COVENANTS. Debtor hereby warrants and covenants: (a) The security interest
      ("the inventory") will be kept at 2216 Hamilton Blvd., South Plainfield,
      New Jersey 07000, and will not be removed from the Premises other than in
      the ordinary course of business. (b) The Debtor will immediately notify
      Secured Party in writing of any change in or discontinuance of Debtor's
      place of business. (c) The parties intend that the security interest ("the
      inventory") is and will at all times remain personal property despite the
      fact and irrespective of the manner n which it is attached to realty. (d)
      Debtor shall maintain insurance at all times with respect to the security
      interest ("the inventory") against risks of fire and theft. The policies
      shall be payable to the Debtor and shall provide for ten (10) days written
      notice of cancellation to Secured Party. (e) The Debtor shall make all
      repairs, replacements, additions, and improvements necessary to maintain
      any equipment in good working order and condition. At its option, Secured
      Party may discharge taxes, liens, or other encumbrances at any time levied
      or placed on the security interest ("the inventory"), may pay rent or
      insurance due on the security interest ("the inventory") and may pay for
      maintenance and preservation of the security interest ("the inventory").

3.    DEFAULT. Debtor shall be in default under this Agreement upon the
      happening of any of the following: (a) any misrepresentation in connection
      with this Agreement on the part of the Debtor. (b) any noncompliance with
      or nonperformance of the Debtor's obligations under the Note or this
      Agreement. No waiver by Secured Party of any default shall operate as a
      waiver of any other default or of the same default on a future occasion.


By:  /s/ Ilona Mitsel
     ------------------------
     Debtor


s/s Henry Doiban Lorcom Technologies, Inc.
------------------------------------------
Date:   11/29/04
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [FRL-6912-3] 

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed settlement. 

# SUMMARY:

The United States Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to enter into two settlement agreements with a total of 45 de-minimis parties for response costs pursuant to section 122(g) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) regarding the Interstate Lead Company (ILCO) Superfund Site located in Leeds, Alabama. EPA will consider public comments on the proposed settlements for thirty (30) days. EPA may withdraw from or modify the proposed settlements should such comments disclose facts or considerations which indicate the proposed settlement is inappropriate, improper or inadequate. Copies of the proposed settlements are available from: Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S. EPA, Region 4 (WMD-PSB), Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, (404) 562-8887.

Written comments may be submitted to Ms. Batchelor on or before January 5, 2001. 

Dated: November 20, 2000.

Anita Davis,

Acting Chief, CERCLA Program Services Branch, Waste Management Division. 

[FR Doc. 00-31052 Filed 12-5-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
<PAGE>

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

                                   EXHIBIT 32

<PAGE>

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned certify that, to their knowledge, the Form 10-K of Wilmington
Trust Corporation ("Wilmington Trust") for 2005 fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Wilmington Trust.

                      /s/ Ted T. Cecala
                      ----------------------------------------------------------
                      Ted T. Cecala
                      Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

                      /s/ David R. Gibson
                      ----------------------------------------------------------
                      David R. Gibson
                      Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Duane Coble, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 1.)

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from his conviction of three counts of first degree robbery and one count of second degree criminal possession of a weapon arising out of his holdup of two supermarkets. He contends that reversal is required as a result of admission of evidence of his prior possession of a handgun; that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct; that the court erred in refusing to sever the two incidents; that the lineups were suggestive; that the court erred in its instruction on reasonable doubt; and that his sentence is harsh and excessive.

It was error to admit evidence that defendant had previously possessed a handgun in the absence of evidence that *982there was any similarity between that weapon and the weapon brandished by defendant during the robberies. Nonetheless, the error was rendered harmless by the overwhelming evidence of guilt *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 238-242), including the unequivocal identification testimony of nine eyewitnesses.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to sever counts two to four, the Super Duper robbery, from count five, the Tops robbery, because the counts were joinable pursuant to CPL 200.20 (2) (b) and (c). The two incidents were jointly triable under the *Molineux*analysis *(see, People v Molineux,*168 NY 264) of CPL 200.20 (2) (b) because defendant’s identity was in issue and his modus operandi was sufficiently unique to make proof of his commission of one robbery probative of his commission of the other. Moreover, the counts were properly joined as the "same or similar in law” (CPL 200.20 [2] [c]), and the court was not required to sever them absent a showing by defendant of "good cause” (CPL 200.20 [3] [a], [b]).

The identification testimony was properly admitted. The lineup was not suggestive and was not tainted by the prosecutor’s remarks preceding it. The prosecutor’s reference to the prior photo identification was ill-advised, but was not tantamount to coaching the witnesses to make a particular selection at the lineup.

The prosecutor’s remarks on summation, in which he repeatedly stated that the People’s witnesses had not lied under oath, were improper and misleading; nevertheless, those comments did not deprive defendant of a fair trial and any prejudice was alleviated by the court’s instructions on evaluating the identification testimony.

Reversal is not required as a result of the unpreserved error in the court’s charge on reasonable doubt *(People v Hartle,*151 AD2d 1003, *lv denied*74 NY2d 810; *People v Cooper,*147 AD2d 926, *lv denied*74 NY2d 738; *People v Garrett,*147 AD2d 905, *lv denied*74 NY2d 664; *People v Jackson,*124 AD2d 975, 976, *lv denied*69 NY2d 746).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Marshall, J. — robbery, first degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)



I, Thomas F. August, President and Chief Executive Officer, of Prentiss Properties Trust (the Registrant), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report):



(1) The Report fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. Section 78m(a) or Section78o(d)); and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|/s/ Thomas F. August               
|Thomas F. August                   
|President & Chief Executive Officer
|August 4, 2004                     



STATE OF TEXAS§

COUNTY OF DALLAS§



Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of August, 2004.



|              
|--------------
|/s/ Lana Mann 
|Lana Mann     
|August 4, 2004



Notary Public

My Commission Expires: 5/26/2005

Official Seal



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32

D&E Communications, Inc. and Subsidiaries

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 for the period ended June 30, 2009 of D&E Communications, Inc. (the Company) as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James W. Morozzi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ James W. Morozzi
|Name:                |  | James W. Morozzi       
|Title:               |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                |  | August 6, 2009         



1



---

D&E Communications, Inc. and Subsidiaries



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 for the period ended June 30, 2009 of D&E Communications, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Thomas E. Morell, 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:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Thomas E. Morell
|Name:                |  | Thomas E. Morell       
|Title:               |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:                |  | August 6, 2009         



2
(December 6, 1990)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carlton Depass, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Antonio Brandveen, J.), rendered July 14, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a prison term of *SVi*to 17 years, unanimously modified, *231as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence to 5 to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the prosecutor was obligated to turn over the property voucher and laboratory analysis request, concerning drugs found on a juvenile codefendant, has not been preserved. Were we to consider the claim, in the interest of justice, we would find it meritless. The evidence concerning the other drugs, elicited by defense counsel, was stricken at defendant’s request. *(Cf, People v Kelly,*62 NY2d 516, 521.)

Defendant’s claim that he should have been advised that a diagram prepared by a police witness contained an error is similarly unpreserved. The diagram had been turned over to the defense for the trial. After the officer stated, on cross-examination, that he had brought the error to the attention of the District Attorney, defense counsel sought and obtained a stipulation. He did not move for a mistrial or other relief. Nor is any relief required in the interest of justice. Counsel used the inconsistency to his advantage on summation.

However, we find the sentence imposed, *81⁄2*to 17 years, excessive, for this crime involving only a single $20 sale of crack. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ross, Carro and Rosenberger, JJ.
#### Thomas K. CASE et al. v. LOS ANGELES LUMBER PRODUCTS CO., Limited.

No. 9569.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

July 29, 1940.

Burr & Smith and Thomas K. Case, all of Los Angeles, Cal, for appellants.

Faries & McDowell, of Los Angeles, Cal, for appellee.

Before WILBUR, MATHEWS, and HEALY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Upon stipulation of counsel fof respective parties, ordered appeal herein dismissed, that a decree of dismissal be filed and entered accordingly, and mandate of this court issue forthwith.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from form 10Q and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such form 10Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000943820
<NAME>                        Sitel Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         22,485
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  124,388
<ALLOWANCES>                                   4,483
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               161,218
<PP&E>                                         194,633
<DEPRECIATION>                                 76,661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 401,561
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,058
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       64
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   401,561
<SALES>                                        431,810
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               431,810
<CGS>                                          243,041
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  424,461
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (188)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             9,422
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,885)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   95
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,710)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                514
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,234)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.03)
        

</TABLE>
Amendment to Employment Agreement



 Exhibit 10.4 
  
 Amendment to Employment Agreement between 
 Slavie Federal Savings Bank and Sophie T. Wittelsberger 
  
 In February 2005, the compensation committee of the board of directors increased Ms. Wittelsberger’s annual compensation, effective January 1, 2005, to $66,000 per year. In February 2005, the compensation
committee of the board of directors also determined that Ms. Wittelsberger was entitled to a bonus of $6,000 for service during 2004.
#### Marvin SUBLETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 21322.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 23, 1940.

R. T. Harris and M. J. Howze, both of Monahans, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appellant has filed his affidavit setting forth his desire to withdraw his appeal in this cause, which appears to be regular. The motion is granted and, upon such showing, the appeal is dismissed.
In accordance with a notice received from the Federal Emergency Management Agency dated January 24, 2000, the above-numbered Declaration is hereby amended to include Hancock and Henderson Counties in the State of Kentucky as a disaster area due to damages caused by tornadoes, severe storms, torrential rains, and flash flooding that occurred on January 3-4, 2000. 

In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the contiguous County of Breckinridge, Kentucky, and Perry, Posey, and Vanderburgh Counties in Indiana may be filed until the specified date at the previously designated location. Any counties contiguous to the above-named primary counties and not listed herein have been previously declared. 

                    All other information remains the same,                     *i.e.,*                     the deadline for filing applications for physical damage is March 10, 2000 and for economic injury the deadline is October 10, 2000.                 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008)

Dated: February 2, 2000. 

Bernard Kulik,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 00-3075 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Care Financing Administration

[Document Identifier: HCFA-566]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Health Care Financing Administration, HHS.
    In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Health Care Financing 
Administration (HCFA), Department of Health and Human Services, is 
publishing the following summary of proposed collections for public 
comment. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this 
burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, 
including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility 
of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of 
the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology to minimize the information 
collection burden.
    Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently 
approved collection;
    Title of Information Collection: Medicare, Managed Care 
Disenrollment Form;
    Form No.: HCFA-566 (OMB# 0938-0507);
    Use: This form is used to disenroll from managed care plans. This 
is to be used in Social Security Field Offices to allow Medicare 
beneficiaries to disenroll from a managed care plan.;
    Frequency: On occasion;
    Affected Public: Individuals or Households, Business or other for-
profit, Not-for-profit institutions, and Federal Government;
    Number of Respondents: 85,000;
    Total Annual Responses: 85,000;
    Total Annual Hours: 2,805.
    To obtain copies of the supporting statement and any related forms 
for the proposed paperwork collections referenced above, access HCFA's 
Web Site address at http://www.hcfa.gov/regs/prdact95.htm, or E-mail 
your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and 
HCFA document identifier, to [email protected], or call the Reports 
Clearance Office on (410) 786-1326. Written comments and 
recommendations for the proposed information collections must be mailed 
within 60 days of this notice directly to the HCFA Paperwork Clearance 
Officer designated at the following address: HCFA, Office of 
Information Services, Security and Standards Group, Division of HCFA 
Enterprise Standards, Attention: Dawn Willinghan, Room N2-14-26, 7500 
Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    Dated: February 3, 2000.
John P. Burke III,
HCFA Reports Clearance Officer, HCFA Office of Information Services, 
Security and Standards Group, Division of HCFA Enterprise Standards.
[FR Doc. 00-3105 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-03-P
```
#### A. GREEN v. STATE.

No. 19579.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 7, 1938.

M. M. Guixin, of Rusk, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for selling intoxicating liquor in Cherokee County, Texas, which county is by proper averments alleged to be dry territory; punishment being a fine of $150 and ten days in jail.

The precise question is presented in the present record as in Sam Watson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 122 S.W.2d 311, this day decided, with reference to the certificate of the county judge as to publication of the order declaring the result of the local option election in Cherokee County:

The reasons which demanded á reversal in Watson’s Case call, for the same order here.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.