alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Ex. 4.41 CEOC Form of Stock Certificate








Exhibit 4.41
	
			
	Certificate No. 
Common-___
	

CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT OPERATING COMPANY, INC. 
Incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware
______________, 2014
	***  ___ Shares ***
Common Stock

	 
	

Authorized Capital Stock:  1,375,000,000 Shares


Common Stock:  1,250,000,000 Shares, par value $.01 per share
Preferred Stock:  125,000,000, par value $.01 per share


	 

	THESE SHARES ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS DESCRIBED ON THE REVERSE HEREOF






THIS CERTIFIES THAT ____________________________ is the record holder of _____________** shares of Common Stock of Caesars Entertainment Operating Company, Inc., transferable only on the books of this Corporation by the holder hereof, in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed or assigned.
This certificate and the shares represented hereby are issued and shall be held subject to all the provisions of the Certificate of Incorporation and the Bylaws of this Corporation and any amendments thereto, to all of which the holders of this certificate, by acceptance hereof, assent.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this _____ day of ________________, 2014.


    
	
			
	James T. Evans III
Vice President and Assistant Treasurer
	 
	Eric Hession  
Senior Vice President and Treasurer













FOR VALUE RECEIVED, ___________________________________ HEREBY SELLS, ASSIGNS AND TRANSFERS UNTO _____________________________________________________________, SHARES REPRESENTED BY THE WITHIN CERTIFICATE, AND DOES HEREBY IRREVOCABLY CONSTITUTE AND APPOINT _______________________________ ATTORNEY TO TRANSFER THE SAID SHARES ON THE BOOKS OF THE WITHIN-NAMED CORPORATION WITH FULL POWER OF SUBSTITUTION IN THE PREMISES.
DATED __________________,  _____
	
		
	IN PRESENCE OF
	IN PRESENCE OF

	       
(Witness)
 

 

	       
(Witness)
 

 


	       
(Shareholder)
 

 

	       
(Shareholder)
 

 


	 
	 






THE SHARES EVIDENCED BY THIS CERTIFICATE HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE “ACT”) AND APPLICABLE STATE SECURITIES LAWS AND MAY NOT BE SOLD OR TRANSFERRED UNLESS (a) THE SALE OR TRANSFER IS COVERED BY AN EFFECTIVE REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE ACT, (b) THE SALE OR TRANSFER IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 144 UNDER THE ACT OR (c) THE COMPANY RECEIVES AN OPINION OF COUNSEL (WHICH COUNSEL AND OPINION ARE REASONABLY SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY) STATING THAT THE SALE OR TRANSFER IS EXEMPT FROM THE REGISTRATION AND PROSPECTUS DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACT AND APPLICABLE STATE SECURITIES LAWS.
A STATEMENT OF ALL OF THE RIGHTS, PREFERENCES, PRIVILEGES AND RESTRICTIONS GRANTED TO OR IMPOSED UPON THE RESPECTIVE CLASSES AND/OR SERIES OF SHARES OF STOCK OF THE COMPANY AND UPON THE HOLDERS THEREOF MAY BE OBTAINED BY ANY SHAREHOLDER UPON REQUEST WITHOUT CHARGE AT THE PRINCIPAL OFFICE OF THE COMPANY.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. BRYCE WILLIAM M c GOWAN,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 23

- 2921 D.C. No. 6:19

- cr - 00563

- MC

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael J. McShane, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2024 **
Before: CALLAHAN, LEE, and FORREST, Circuit Judges

. Bryce William McGowan appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 9

- month sentence imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. McGowan contends that the district court failed to consider his need for

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 1 2024 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 2921

substance abuse treatment and did not justify its decision to impose imprisonment instead of residential treatment

. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia

- Barragan , 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010) , and conclude there is none. The record make s clear that the court considered McGowan’s background and rehabilitative needs , and determined that a carceral term was warranted in light of McGowan’s poor history on supervision

. See United States v. Carty , 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). T he court selected the sentence to sanction McGowan’s breach of the court’s trust and not, as McGowan contends, to punish him. See United States v. Simtob , 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007)

. McGowan also contends that his sentence is substantively un reasonable because it fails to give sufficient weight to his recent rehabilitative efforts and need for continued treatment , improperly punishes him for his behavior during the revocation proceedings , and because his violations were technical

. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The record belies McGowan’s assertion that his behavior before the court influenced the sentence. The 9

- m onth sentence , imposed after the district court had twice continued proceedings to allow McGowan time to come into compliance, is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.
See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); Gall , 552 U.S. at 51

. AFFIRMED.
##### 




    
    Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations  Critical Accounting Policies included
in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for Cooper Industries, Ltd. for the year ended
December 31, 2006, and in Note 16: Charge Related to Discontinued Operations to its
consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006.
    
    Part I; Item 1. Financial Statements; Note 11. Charge Related to Discontinued
Operations, and under Part II  Other Information; Item 1. Legal Proceedings
included in the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2007.
mscc1002.htm






  





  









AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT










WHEREAS, MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY CHARTER CAMPBELL L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “General Partner”), and CAMPBELL & COMPANY, INC., a Maryland corporation (the “Trading Advisor”), have agreed to amend the Management Agreement, by and among the Partnership, the General Partner, and the Trading Advisor, dated as of August 31, 2002, as amended by an Amendment No. 1 to the Management Agreement dated as of July 31, 2003, Amendment No. 2 to the Management Agreement dated as of June 13, 2006, and Amendment No. 3 to the Management Agreement dated as of January 1, 2011 (together, the “Management Agreement”) to reduce the monthly management fee rate payable to the Trading Advisor.  Terms used and not otherwise defined herein have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Management Agreement.







WHEREAS, all provisions contained in the Management Agreement remain in full force and effect and are modified only to the extent necessary to provide for the amendments set forth below;







 


NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto hereby amend the Management Agreement as follows:


 






	
1.  

	
The monthly management fee rate equal to 1/12 of 2.00% (a 2.00% annual rate) referred to in Section 6(a)(i) of the Management Agreement is hereby reduced to a monthly management fee rate equal to 1/12 of 1.50% (a 1.50% annual rate).



















	
2.  

	
The foregoing amendment shall take effect as of the first day of June, 2014.



















	
3.  

	
This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute the same agreement.



















	
4.  

	
This Amendment No. 4 shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York.























 













 





 








  





  











  

















IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 4 to the Management Agreement has been executed for and on behalf of the undersigned as of the 27th day of May, 2014.





 










MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY


CHARTER CAMPBELL L.P.













By      /s/ Alper Daglioglu                                                      





                    Ceres Managed Futures LLC


                    as General Partner










By      /s/ Alper Daglioglu                                                      





               Name:   Alper Daglioglu


   Title:     President and Director












CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC










By      /s/ Alper Daglioglu                                                      





               Name:   Alper Daglioglu


   Title:   President and Director












CAMPBELL & COMPANY, INC.










By      /s/ Thomas P. Lloyd 





               Name: Thomas P. Lloyd


   Title:   General Counsel










By      /s/ Gregory T. Donovan 





               Name:   Gregory T. Donovan


  Title: Chief Financial Officer
# Official Journal L 185/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 185 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6312 June 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 185

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6312 June 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/760 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the rules for the administration of import and export tariff quotas subject to licences and supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the lodging of securities in the administration of tariff quotas | 1 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/761 of 17 December 2019 laying down rules for the application of Regulations (EU) No 1306/2013, (EU) No 1308/2013 and (EU) No 510/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the management system of tariff quotas with licences | 24 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/760 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the rules for the administration of import and export tariff quotas subject to licences and supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the lodging of securities in the administration of tariff quotas

1

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/761 of 17 December 2019 laying down rules for the application of Regulations (EU) No 1306/2013, (EU) No 1308/2013 and (EU) No 510/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the management system of tariff quotas with licences

24

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
##### 



/s/ Marc Kilbride

Marc KilbrideVice President and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)August 10, 2007
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 1796
In re: RAYMOND EDWARD CHESTNUT, a/k/a Snoop, a/k/a Ray , Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus . ( 4:05

- cr - 01044

- RBH

- 1 )

Submitted : November 21, 2019 Decided: November 2 5, 2019

Before KEENAN and DIAZ , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

. Raymond Edward Chestnut , Petitioner Pro Se

. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Raymond Edward Chestnut filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking an order compelling the district court to act on his May 31, 2019, motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order holding that Chestnut was not entitled to a full resentencing hearing
under § 404 of the First Step Act of 2018 (“First Step Act”), Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court denied Chestnut’s motion f or reconsideration on August 1, 2019. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materia ls before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. PETITION DENIED
EX-35.2
(logo) Situs

Situs Holdings, LLC
2 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1300
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: 415.374.2820
Fax: 415.374.2704

Annual Compliance Statements
For period of October 1 through December 31, 2012

MORGAN STANLEY BANK OF AMERICA MERRILL LYNCH TRUST 2012-C6,
COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES
SERIES 2012-C6

Depositor: Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.
Certificate Administrator: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, I attest that:

(A) A review of the activities of Situs Holdings, LLC, as Trust Advisor, during
the period of October 1 through December 31, 2012 and of its performance under
this Agreement has been made under my supervision.

(B) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Situs Holdings, LLC, as
Trust Advisor, has fulfilled all its obligations under the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such period.


By: /s/ George Wisniewski
George Wisniewski
Senior Managing Director

Date: March 15, 2013
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 198 (Friday, October 11, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 82628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23595]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Z-Wave Alliance

    Notice is hereby given that, on July 15, 2024, pursuant to section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Z-Wave Alliance, Inc. (the 
``Joint Venture'') filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Specifically, EcoDim, Doetinchem, Gelderland, NETHERLANDS; Hank 
Smart Tech Co. Ltd., Shenzhen, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Leak 
Intelligence LLC, Franklin, TN; M2M Services, Hoofddorp, NETHERLANDS; 
Keaton Chia (University of California, San Diego (Kleissl Lab)), La 
Jolla, CA; B-Smartfoils, Rauenberg, GERMANY; HAB Home Intelligence, 
Arlington, TX; Shenzhen Neo Electronics Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, PEOPLE'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Shenzhen Sunricher Technology Limited, Shenzhen, 
PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; and Springs Window Fashions, LLC, 
Middleton, WI, have been added as parties to the venture.
    Also, Atsumi Electric, Shizuoka, JAPAN; B-Smart Integration, 
Rauenberg, GERMANY; GOAP Racunalniski inzeniring in avtomatizacija 
procesov d.o.o. Nova Gorica, Solkan, SLOVENIA; Shenzhen Shyugj 
Technology Co., Ltd., Guangdon, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; 
ZoneSystems.est, Khobar City, SAUDI ARABIA; and Ochsner Clinic 
Foundation, New Orleans, LA, have withdrawn as parties to the venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or the 
planned activity of the venture. Membership in this venture remains 
open, and the Joint Venture intends to file additional written 
notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On November 19, 2020, the Joint Venture filed its original 
notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 
6(b) of the Act on December 1, 2020 (85 FR 77241).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 14, 
2024. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on July 29, 2024 (89 FR 60918).

Suzanne Morris,
Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2024-23595 Filed 10-10-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### JAMES v. FLIPPEN.

No. 3332.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Dec. 8, 1938.

David E. O’Fiel, of Beaumont, for appellant.

Smith, Smith & Boyd, of Beaumont, for appellee.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

This was an action in the County Court of Jefferson County, at law, by appellant, J. E. James, against appellee, Mrs. Bessie Flippen, individually, and as administra-trix of the estate of H. G. Flippin, deed., to recover a balance of $92.50 alleged to be due on a promissory note executed by the deceased to appellant, and to foreclose an eqrfitable chattel mortgage lien upon an automobile. On the issues made by the pleadings, the jury found that nothing was due upon the note sued upon, and that the deceased had not promised to execute to appellant a chattel mortgage upon the au'tomobile. Other issues were submitted to the jury, but they are immaterial on the questions presented by the appeal. On the verdict, judgment was entered against appellant that he recover nothing, and in favor of appellee that she go hence without day and recover her costs.

We overrule appellant’s assignment that the verdict of the jury was without support in the evidence, and against all the evidence. Appellant testified affirmatively that the balance due on the note was $92.50, and appellee offered no testimony in rebuttal. But the jury was not required to accept as true appellant’s testimony; it heard him testify, and noted the conflicts in his testimony on other points.' It was the prerogative of the jury to refuse to accept as true anything and everything testified to by appellant.

Appellant’s assignment against the argument of appellee’s counsel does not show error. The objection was to the argument as a whole — that portion of it brought forward in the assignment of error. Some of the argument brought forward in the assignment was clearly not erroneous; it was a fair discussion of the evidence before the jury, and of the deductions to be drawn therefrom. The general rule is that, where a part of the argument complained of is permissible and a part of it objectionable, the complaining party should point out and direct the attention of the trial court to the part complained of. McClure v. Fall, Tex.Civ.App., 42 S.W.2d 821, affirmed Tex.Com.App., 67 S.W.2d 231; Ferguson v. Fain, Tex.Civ.*1091App., 164 S.W. 1040; Magnolia Pipe Line Company v. Leach, Tex.Civ.App., 17 S.W.2d 471.

The judgment of the lower court is in all things affirmed.
#### THOMAS v. STATE.

No. 18210.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 15, 1936.

Le Roy Neal, of Gladewater, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for forgery of a check drawn against the First National Bank of Gilmer, Tex. Punishment was assessed at four years in the penitentiary.

Appellant files with the record a brief complaining of the refusal of his first application for continuance and to certain testimony heard by the court at the time his motion for new trial Was presented, which motion was based on the action of the court in refusing said continuance.

No statement of facts is brought forward and no bills of exception complaining of the action of the court on the application of continuance, and no testimony heard upon the motion for new trial relative thereto is brought forward. In such condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 33.6

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE

CoreLogic
Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the Asserting Party), an indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc, is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31, 2013, and for the period from January 1. 2013 through
December 31, 2013 (the Reporting Period) with the servicing criteria set forth in Title 17, Sections 229.1122(d)(1)(iv), (d)(2)(v), (d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii) and (d)(4)(xiii) of the Code of Federal Regulations
applicable to the Asserting Party (the Applicable Servicing Criteria). The servicing activities covered by this report include all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Asserting Party served as the
commercial tax service provider (the Platform).

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for
the Reporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2013, and for the Reporting Period with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2013, and for the Reporting Period.

CORELOGIC COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ Vicki Chenault   
|Vicki Chenault,      
|Senior Vice President
|February 14, 2014
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **DATE:                May 14, 2008** | **/s/                Donald W. Hughes**    |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                                  | **Donald                W. Hughes**        |
|                                  | **Chief                Financial Officer** |

*A      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been      provided to Camden Learning Corporation and will be retained by Camden Learning      Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its      staff      upon request.*

----