alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.26








AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




WHEREAS, James A. Lank (“Executive”) and Tesco Corporation entered into the Employment Agreement dated December 31, 2007, as amended on March 15, 2009 and as thereafter supplemented by the letter dated July 19, 2010 between the parties (the “Agreement”); and




WHEREAS, Section 7(i)(v) of the Agreement has an error with respect to the timing of payment and no amount is vested thereunder and the parties desire to amend Section 7(f) of the Agreement to add requirements under new guidance from the Internal Revenue Service;




NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed that the Agreement shall be amended as follows:




1.
Section 7(f) shall be amended to add the following at the end thereof:




“Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent any amounts payable under Sections 7(c), (d) or (e) are deferred compensation and not otherwise exempt from the requirements of Code Section 409A, no payment will be paid or commence to be paid hereunder until the date which is the 60th day after the Date of Termination.”




2.
Section 7(i)(v) shall be amended so that the word “second” shall be replaced with the word “first” in each place in which it occurs.




This Amendment may be executed by portable document format (pdf) or facsimile signature which signature shall be binding on the parties hereto.




WHEREAS, the parties have executed this Amendment effective as of December 31, 2010.




EXECUTIVE                                                                                     TESCO CORPORATION





JAMES A. LANK








/s/ James A. Lank                                                      By: /s/ Julio M. Quintana


James A. Lank                                                                                                Julio M. Quintana


President and CEO


1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
VIRTUAL TELECOM, INC. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF DECEMBER
31, 1997 AND 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         569,264
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   75,622
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,691
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,773,302
<PP&E>                                       1,402,735
<DEPRECIATION>                                 215,962
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,985,949
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          913,336
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,072
<COMMON>                                         5,375
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,866,052
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,985,949
<SALES>                                        112,446
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,446
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  664,591
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,754,670
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 9,691
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              47,233 <F1>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,359,209)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,359,209)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,359,209)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.53)
<FN>
<F1> INCLUDING CAPITALISED AND ACCRUED INTEREST
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Burnie Short v. The People, etc.

1. Intoxicating *Liquors—What is Not a Sale to a Minor.—Several*persons contributed a sum of money and sent a minor with it for beer, which he got and carried back to them. *Held,*that if the beer was sold to the minor as the agent of the persons contributing the money to buy it, there could be no conviction of the vendor for selling intoxicating liquors to minors.

Indictment for Selling Intoxicating Liquors to Minors.—Error to the Circuit Court of Ford County; the Hon. Colostin D. Myers, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the May term, 1901.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed September 11, 1901.

Kerr & Findley, attorneys for plaintiff in error; Payson *&*Kessler, of counsel.

A. L. Phillips, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Wright

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an indictment against the plaintiff in error for selling intoxicating liquors to Alonzo Phillips, a minor, without the written order of his parent, guardian or family physician. A trial by jury ended in a verdict of guilty upon the first count of the indictment, and the court, having overruled a motion for a new trial, gave judgment against the plaintiff in error for a fine of one hundred dollars and the costs of prosecution, to reverse which this writ of error is prosecuted, and to accomplish such reversal it is argued the verdict is against the law and the evidence of the case.

We think the evidence establishes the fact that twenty-seven bottles of beer were delivered by plaintiff in error to Alonzo Phillips, a minor, as the agent of Rowland and *639others who had together contributed $2.85, the price of the beer, which sum, at the request of Rowland and others, the boy carried to plaintitf in error, received the beer and conveyed it in a buggy to the village of Melvin, where" it was received by those who contributed the money. It does not appear the boy got or drank any of the beer, or that he had any interest therein. He was hired to convey the beer from plaintiff in error to the purchasers. He had a written order from Rowland for the beer to be purchased for Rowland. The court instructed the jury, both at the request of the people and defendant, that if the beer was sold to Phillips as the agent of others, there could be no conviction. We think such instruction is clearly the law, and besides, having induced the court to instruct the jury that such was the law, the prosecution is in no position to claim in this court that a sale to the minor as the agent of others would be a violation of the statute. It is clear from the evidence the sale was so made, and was in reality a sale to those who furnished the money, and received the beer, the boy being a mere carrier for hire. The judgment of the Circuit Court will be reversed and the cause remanded.
# C_2014262EN.01000201.xml

| 12.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/2

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2014/C 262/02)

Image

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuance of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national side features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country
  : Belgium

Issuing country

Subject of commemoration
  : 150 years of the Belgian Red Cross

Subject of commemoration

Description of the design
  : The inner part of the coin features a cross with the number ‘150’ in its centre. The vertical and horizontal bars of the cross bear the words ‘Rode Kruis’ and ‘Croix-Rouge’ respectively. The cross is surrounded by the mark of the Brussels mint (a helmeted profile of the archangel Michael), the signature mark of the Master of the Mint, the year 2014, and the country code ‘BE’.

Description of the design

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued
  : 260 000 coins

Number of coins to be issued

Date of issue
  : September 2014

Date of issue

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national sides of all the coins issued in 2002.

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

2

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RONNIE EUGENE JOHNSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 12 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of June, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
                          -----------------------------

The Board of Directors
Deltic Timber Corporation:



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
333-34317) on Form S-8 of Deltic Timber Corporation of our report dated February
9, 2001, except as to the first paragraph of Note 7, which is as of March 31,
2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Deltic Timber Corporation
and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related consolidated
statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years
in the three-year period ended December 31, 2000, which report appears in the
December 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of Deltic Timber Corporation.

KPMG LLP
Shreveport, Louisiana
March 28, 2001

                                      79
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.                  

###### Office of Personnel Management

          - 45 CFR Part 800
          - RIN 3206-AN12

# AGENCY:

Office of Personnel Management.

# ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is correcting a final rule that appeared in the **Federal Register** of February 24, 2015 (80 FR 9649). The document implementing modifications to the Multi-State Plan (MSP) Program based on the experience of the Program to date.

# DATES:

Effective March 26, 2015.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cameron Stokes by telephone at (202) 606-2128, by FAX at (202) 606-4430, or by email at *mspp@opm.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In FR Doc. 2015-03421, appearing on page 9649 in the **Federal Register** of Tuesday, February 24, 2015, the following corrections are made:

1. On page 9655, in the third column, the heading “List of Subjects in 5 CFR part 800” is revised to read, “List of Subjects in 45 CFR part 800.”

2. On page 9655, in the third column, the last paragraph should be revised to read:

“Accordingly, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is revising part 800 to title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, to read as follows:”

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Steve Hickman,

Regulatory Affairs, Office of the Executive Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 2015-07330 Filed 3-26-15; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 6325-64-P
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Acrongenomics Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned, Ron Lizée, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge:

|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.

August 18, 2008

| | /s/
      Ron Lizée                                   
| | ------------------------------------------------------
| | Ron Lizée                                             
| | Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, and
      Director
| | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal            
| | Accounting Officer)                                   

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

---
[KCAP Financial letterhead]


 


April 22, 2013


 


Mr. R. Jon Corless


KCAP Financial, Inc.


295 Madison Avenue, 6th Floor


New York, NY 10017


 


Dear Jon:


 


This letter constitutes an amendment to
your employment agreement with Kohlberg Capital Corporation, now known as KCAP Financial, Inc., dated June 27, 2012 (the “Employment
Agreement”), pursuant to Section 11(a) of the Employment Agreement. Except as specifically stated herein, the terms and conditions
described in your Employment Agreement will remain in effect.


 


Effective as of the date first written above,
Section 4(c) of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the last sentence thereof.


 


If the foregoing is acceptable to you, please
sign this letter in the space provided and return it to me. We will provide a countersigned copy for your records.


 


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	/s/ Dayl W. Pearson
	 	 
	 	Dayl W. Pearson
	 	President and Chief Executive Officer


 


 


Accepted by:


 


/s/ R. Jon Corless


 



R. Jon Corless


 


Date: April 22, 2013
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROY’LAND RICE,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

EL CERRITO POLICE DEPARTMENT,

ET AL,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-15963

D.C. No. 5-11-cv-06295-EJD

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Edward J. Davila, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 15, 2016

San Francisco, California

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judge, and EZRA,**

District Judge. 

 

Roy’land Rice appeals from the district court’s summary judgment in his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations

FILED

NOV 30 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The Honorable David A. Ezra, United States District Judge for the

District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.
arising out of the impounding of his vehicle for expired registration tags. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, and may affirm on any

ground supported by the record. Miranda v. City of Cornelius, 429 F.3d 858, 860

n.1 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Rice’s procedural

due process claims because Rice failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as

to whether he possessed a constitutionally protected property interest in the

impounded vehicle. See Llamas v. Butte Cmty. Coll. Dist., 238 F.3d 1123, 1128

(9th Cir. 2001) (“The Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due

process applies when a constitutionally protected property or liberty interest is at

stake.”); see also Scofield v. City of Hillsborough, 862 F.2d 759, 762–65 (9th Cir.

1988) (holding that pre-tow notice and hearing are not required before impounding

a vehicle with expired registration). On the record before us, it is impossible to

determine what interest, if any, Rice had in the vehicle. What is certain is that he

was neither its registered nor its legal owner under California law. Further, Seidell

Enterprises did provide actual notice to Rice’s last associated address. 

To the extent it was properly raised, dismissal of Rice’s Fourth Amendment

claim was proper because Rice failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the

search and seizure were unlawful. See, e.g., South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S.

-2-
364, 368–69 (1976); Hallstrom v. City of Garden City, 991 F.2d 1473, 1477, n.4

(9th Cir. 1993). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Rice’s motion to

join Seidell Enterprises, Inc., as a defendant. See Clement v. City of Glendale,

518 F.3d 1090, 1096–97 (9th Cir. 2008) (private towing company entitled to “good

faith” defense because authorized by police department and constitutional

defect/lack of notice could not have been known at time).

AFFIRMED.

-3-
MEMO ROUTING SLIP NEYEii ~ FfJit. Ml'ROYALS. DISAl'l'R.OYALS. 

"CONCUMENCBS, OR. Slllll..flt. Aa'IONS 

I llAllE OB TI1LE INITIALS 

ORGAlllZATION A11D LOCATIOll DATE 

a 

a 

• 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

CEGRE) 

DD FORM 95 JleplaaesDA AOOl'orm1185.1Apr48,aad.AJ'BQ I FEB liO him 12. 10 Nol' 47, w.blch _, 111 llllid. 

CIRCULA11 

COORDllNA'llOll 

INFORllATIClll 

NOTE AND 

REIURll 

EllE 

SM1URE 
EO 3.3(h)(2) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

6ECRE"0 

• 
.. • . - . DISPOSITION FORM •rm» stL.mf e:am 

FILE 110. SUBJECT 

Docu: .cnta, .loturn al 

TD S/P.BS'J1. 

(:r.t:. Fried.~) 

FROM DATE 10 Feb 1953 •••m10.1 

It 1s requestci tha.t the cnclosoe docu ~nt bQ returned ro this office 'Whan 

the7 hc.ve fulfilled their purpose. 

Encl: 

Q'D/03/53 

fOP SECRETHCOMl~fll 

... 

DD aRr'ao 96 ......... ,.. ... ,OCT&W111CH11o1Y•uma. 

. s. UJOC"a 

Capto.in, UBii 

Chief, 118."a. 92 

I 

'I I ' ) 

. 

... -. .. ···----
EO 3.3(n)(2) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 
I ftfm clolnun•t f8 to be nU ~ bJ" u.-....... ~ lndaeulnated la ......_ wltla - EQ'3. 3 ( h) ( 2) llllllld•tloll ln'1llllam• •aarlt,. l'llUlad-ud autlaadad to 191111ft ti. 1111-.tlcna nparild ...._ 

PL 86..,36/50 USC 3605 
- --~~~~~~~~~~~~----------------

-~O, S~ WE¥6l1AN!E 

Tldll ............ to ....... Ollb' ...,. .. ~ ... ~ .............. _ ....... 1:11 _ 

· ' mnnllallDal•......._--'_.........._ilacl11111:1a1-dtoN111wcm1ar__.....,.... ...... 

EQ3.3(h)(2) 

PL 86..,36/50 USC 3605 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY . '-,Ti~- TOP SECRiiiitillANOE 
. -

I°' S~11!T-9eNdE EO 3~3(hJ(2) ftl111l11-m&lltolle...a~l!w .. ~ ....... l f1 .. ''la 11 ' ........ lrd •I Zs ._.,,, ,,,._,._.,mtu-..ea....._ ........... .,.........._ 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY 
NATIONAL SECURITY ·AGENCY '-11:1~·.TOP SECRET C ... \:NOE
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 22, 2016

NO. 03-16-00019-CV

Empower Texans, Inc. and Michael Quinn Sullivan, Appellants

v.

The State of Texas Ethics Commission; Natalia Luna Ashley, in her Capacity as Executive 

Director of the Texas Ethics Commission; Tom Ramsay, Individually and in his Capacity 

as Commissioner; Steven P. Wolens, Individually and in his Capacity as Commissioner; 

Hugh C. Akin, Individually and in his Capacity as Commissioner; James T. Clancy, 

Individually and in his Capacity as Commissioner; Wilhelmina R. Delco, Individually and 

in her Capacity as Commissioner; Mary K. Kennedy, Individually and in her Capacity as 

Commissioner; Chad M. Craycraft, Individually and in his Capacity as Commissioner; and 

Charles G. Untermeyer, Individually and in his Capacity as Commissioner, Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE 53RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the trial court on December 29, 2015.

The Court has concluded that it lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the Court dismisses 

the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in 

this Court and the court below.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          19,016
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,298
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,065
<INVENTORY>                                     11,208
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,581
<PP&E>                                          66,047
<DEPRECIATION>                                  53,879
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,419
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,591
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,962
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,419
<SALES>                                         14,792
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,792
<CGS>                                           11,541
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,541
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (100)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (194)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,308)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       151
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,459)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,459)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.53)
        

</TABLE>