alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment to Security Agreement, dated September 7, 2004



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 AMENDMENT TO SECURITY AGREEMENT 
  
 THIS AMENDMENT is made as of the 7th day of September, 2004, by and between FIRST ADV ANT AGE CORPORATION, doing business in Florida as First
Advantage Holding, Inc. (the “Borrower”), a Delaware corporation and BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. (the “Bank”). 
  
 Recitals 
  
 The Borrower and the Bank executed a Security Agreement (as amended from time to time, the “Security Agreement”) dated July 31, 2003. The
parties wish to amend the Security Agreement in accordance with the terms hereof. 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: 
  
 1. The term “Note” as defined in the Recitals to the Security Agreement is hereby amended so that, from and after the date hereof, the term
“Note” shall mean that certain Renewal Promissory Note dated September 7, 2004, executed by the Borrower in favor of the Bank in the principal amount of $20,000,000.00 (as such Note may be amended, extended or renewed from time to time).

  
 2. The Borrower certifies that as of the date hereof:
(a) all of its representations and warranties in the Security Agreement are true and correct as if made on the date hereof; and (b) no Default or Event of Default has occurred under the Security Agreement. The Security Agreement, as modified
herein, shall continue in full force and effect from and after the date hereof. 
  
 DATED the day and year first above written. 
  

			
	BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
		
	By:	 	  


	Its:	 	  




  

			
	FIRST ADVANTAGE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, doing business in Florida as FIRST ADVANTAGE HOLDING, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ John C. Lamson


	Its:	 	EVP and CFO
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20661 Summary Calendar

NOEL C. ALLEN, Individually and on behalf of the Estate of Travis O’Neill Allen; REBECCA O’NEILL ALLEN, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus MICHAEL LEAL ET AL., Defendants, MICHAEL LEAL; CARLE UPSHAW, Defendants-Appellants.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-97-CV-0030

- - - - - - - - - - April 21, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Defendants Leal and Upshaw appeal from the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity. They argue that the district court erred by denying their summary-judgment motion and that this court has jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal. Because there is a2

significant fact-related dispute, however, this court does not have jurisdiction to review the denial of the motion for summary judgment. See Johnson v. Jones , 515 U.S. 304, 313 (1995). APPEAL DISMISSED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DOMINIQUE TISINGER,

Defendant BelowAppellant,

v. STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § No. 568, 2016 § § § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID 1510007181 § § Submitted: March 15, 2017 Decided: April 20, 2017

Before STRINE , Chief Justice; VAUGHN , and SEITZ , Justices.

ORDER

This 20 th day of April 2017, it appears to the Court that: (1) On November 29, 2016, the Court received appell ant Dominique Tisinger’s notice of appeal from a Superior Court o rder dated October 7, 2016. The Superior Court’s order sentenced Tisinger on se veral criminal convictions and a violation of probation following his guilty plea. Under Supreme Court Rule 6(a)(iii), a timely notice of appeal should have be en filed on or before November 7,

2016. (2) The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directin g Tisinger to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed as unt imely. Tisinger filed a response on December 9, 2016. He contends that his notice of appeal was2

untimely because: (i) his appointed counsel failed to respond to his requests about filing an appeal; (ii) he did not have access to th e law library to find out the rules for filing an appeal; and (iii) he thought that he had ninety days to file his appeal. (3) The Court requested Tisinger’s court-appointed counsel to reply to Tisinger’s response. After an extension, the Court received counsel’s reply on March 15, 2017. Counsel asserts that that she had discussed the appeal process with Tisinger the day before he was sentenced and i nformed him of the 30 day appeal period. Tisinger did not request counsel to file an appeal and did not contact her after his sentencing to inquire about a n appeal. (4) Time is a jurisdictional requirement. 1 A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk of this Court w ithin the applicable time period

in order to be effective. 2 This Court cannot consider an untimely appeal unl ess an appellant can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel. 3 Tisinger has not made such a showing in this case. Thus, the Court concludes that his appe al must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is DI SMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice

1 Carr v. State , 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 829 (1989). 2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a). 3 Bey v. State , 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

July 24, 2007 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JEANIE MARIE SEALS

 Appeal from the Criminal Court for Hamblen County

No. 05CR035 James Edward Beckner, Judge

No. E2006-01878-CCA-R3-CD - Filed January 8, 2008

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., J., concurring.

I concur in the results reached by the majority as I would also remand this case for a new

trial. I write separately to note the manner in which I believe that the proposed testimony of nurse

Teresa Hudgens—namely, that the defendant contacted Hudgens via telephone and told Hudgens that

the victim threatened to kill the defendant—was admissible.

As noted by the majority, evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible hearsay may be

admitted in certain circumstances if the evidence is necessary for the defendant to present a defense.

State v. Flood, 219 S.W.3d 307, 316-17 (Tenn. 2007). The three Flood factors were all met here.

Hudgens’ proposed testimony and the note Hudgens made when the defendant contacted her were

critical to the defense. The prosecution challenged the defendant’s credibility during crossexamination. The prosecutor told the defendant, “It’s very important that you be believed,” and

Hudgens’ testimony would have aided the jury in determining whether the defendant was credible.

Hudgens’ testimony did bear sufficient indicia of reliability in that the nurse kept a written note made

contemporaneously to the defendant’s statement, and the defendant was willing to introduce that note

into evidence. Finally, the interest served by excluding the nurse’s testimony did not justify

exclusion. The Rules of Evidence would have permitted the nurse’s testimony to be admitted as a

prior consistent statement had the testimony been presented after the defendant’s credibility was

attacked. See State v. Meeks, 867 S.W.2d 361, 374 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). In this case, the

defense counsel may well have been dissuaded from recalling Hudgens, who testified prior to the

defendant, after the defendant’s credibility had been attacked, in light of the trial court’s statement

to defense counsel that “you know, as a lawyer, or you should know, what you’re able to present and

what you can’t present, and the laws of evidence are clear and well defined.” 

In light of these reasons, I would have concluded that Hudgens’ testimony was admissible

had it been properly presented. Therefore, I join in the majority’s conclusion remanding this case
-2-

to the Criminal Court for Hamblen County for a new trial.

_______________________________

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., JUDGE
**EXHIBIT 23
 

 

            		CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

 

     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our reports included or incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K for the year ended November 3, 2001 into the Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Numbers 33-20437, 33-61322, 333-60381 and 333-30878, 333-60316) and Form S-3 (File Numbers 333-24527, 333-90745, 333-38246 and 333-38218).

 

 

 

/s/ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

 

St. Louis, Missouri

January 25, 2002

 **
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of report (Date of earliest event reported) August 2, 2016





ELECTRONIC ARTS INC.


(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)








Delaware0-1794894-2838567(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)(Commission File Number)(IRS Employer Identification No.)








209 Redwood Shores Parkway, Redwood City, California 94065-1175


(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)








(650) 628-1500


(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)








(Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)














Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions ( see General Instruction A.2. below):








oWritten communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)oSoliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))








---










Item 2.02    Result of Operations and Financial Condition.





On August 2, 2016, Electronic Arts Inc. (“EA”) issued a press release announcing its financial results for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2016. A copy of the press release is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1.





Neither the information in this Form 8-K nor the information in the press release shall be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.











Item 9.01    Financial Statements and Exhibits.





(d) Exhibits.


Exhibit No.Description99.1Press release dated August 2, 2016, relating to Electronic Arts Inc.’s financial results for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2016.











---










SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.











ELECTRONIC ARTS INC.Dated:August 2, 2016By:/s/ Blake JorgensenBlake JorgensenExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

















---













INDEX TO EXHIBITS





Exhibit No.Description99.1Press release dated August 2, 2016, relating to Electronic Arts Inc.’s financial results for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2016.
II 

Calendar No. 609 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2880 

[Report No. 114–337] 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 25, 2016 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 

Reported by Ms. MURKOWSKI, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the Martin Luther King, Junior, National 

Historic Site in the State of Georgia, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Martin Luther King, 

5 Jr. National Historical Park Act of 2016’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2880 RS

1 SEC. 2. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. NATIONAL HISTORICAL 

2 PARK. 

3 The Act entitled ‘‘An Act to establish the Martin Lu4 ther King, Junior, National Historic Site in the State of 

5 Georgia, and for other purposes’’ (Public Law 96–428) 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (a) of the first section, by 

8 striking ‘‘the map entitled ‘Martin Luther King, 

9 Junior, National Historic Site Boundary Map’, num10 ber 489/80,013B, and dated September 1992’’ and 

11 inserting ‘‘the map entitled ‘Martin Luther King, Jr. 

12 National Historical Park Proposed Boundary Revi13 sion’, numbered 489/128,786 and dated June 

14 2015’’; 

15 (2) by striking ‘‘Martin Luther King, Junior, 

16 National Historic Site’’ each place it appears and in17 serting ‘‘Martin Luther King, Jr. National Histor18 ical Park’’; 

19 (3) by striking ‘‘national historic site’’ each 

20 place it appears and inserting ‘‘national historical 

21 park’’; 

22 (4) by striking ‘‘historic site’’ each place it ap23 pears and inserting ‘‘historical park’’; and 

24 (5) by striking ‘‘historic sites’’ in section 2(a) 

25 and inserting ‘‘historical parks’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2880 RS

1 SEC. 3. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law (other than this Act), map, 

3 regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

4 States to ‘‘Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic 

5 Site’’ shall be deemed to be a reference to ‘‘Martin Luther 

6 King, Jr. National Historical Park’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 609 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2880 

[Report No. 114–337] 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the Martin Luther King, Junior, 

and for other purposes. National Historic Site in the State of Georgia, 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 

Reported without amendment 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
# C_2022113EN.01002401.xml

| 9.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/24

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2022/C 113/05)

1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA) | The People’s Republic of China | Anti-dumping duty | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2230 of 4 December 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  (OJ L 319, 5.12.2017, p. 10) | 6.12.2022 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA)

The People’s Republic of China

Anti-dumping duty

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2230 of 4 December 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(OJ L 319, 5.12.2017, p. 10)

6.12.2022

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column.

---
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-‘-j z

~ 75 Hawthorne Street

Ifi;. ~)I(~-~ San Francisco, CA 94105

+)~1L PR0~

October 15, 2014

Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency

Bldg No.2695, Window Rock Blvd

Window Rock AZ 86515

ATTN: ADMIN OFFICE

Subject: Request to retain public documents at the Navajo Nation EPA for public inspection

To Whom It May Concern:

The purpose of this letter is to request that the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency retain

the enclosed documents at the agency location for at least sixty (60) days for public inspection. These

documents are the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision for the proposed

Clean Air Act Prevention of Significant Deterioration amendment permit for the McElmo Creek Unit

Oil Production Facility on the Navajo Nation Indian Reservation near the city ofAneth, San Juan

County, Utah. These documents are currently available for public comment.

Please contact me at (415) 947-4156 or kel1y.shaheerahc~epa.gov if you have any questions.

Sincerely, tie

Shaheerah Kelly, Environmental Engineer

Permits Office

Air Division

Enclosures
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2022351EN.01000401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 14.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 351/4 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10872 – GEELY / RENAULT / RENAULT KOREA MOTORS)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 351/03)

1.

On 5 September 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2022351EN.01000401-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Geely Automobile Holdings Limited (‘Geely’, Cayman Islands), a subsidiary of Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd. (PR China), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Renault S.A.S. (‘Renault’, France), a subsidiary of Renault S.A. (France). |

Geely and Renault will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Renault Korea Motors Co., Ltd. (‘Target’), a company incorporated and active in South Korea currently held by a subsidiary of Renault and Samsung. The Target is currently solely controlled by Renault.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:

Geely manufactures and sells passenger cars worldwide,

Renault manufactures and sells passenger cars and light commercial vehicles, supplies automotive parts and provides mobility services.

3.

The business activities of the Target are the following:

Manufacture and sales of passenger cars in South Korea and export of passenger cars into adjacent markets in Asia.

4.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2022351EN.01000401-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

5.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10872 – GEELY / RENAULT / RENAULT KOREA MOTORS

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2022351EN.01000401-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2022351EN.01000401-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         September 19, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 3, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 327 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-608, CP2024-616.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-21314 Filed 9-18-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P