alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 35.1

Servicer Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.

This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered to you pursuant to Section 4.10 (a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of
September 3, 2011 (the Agreement) and Item 1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2011-4 (the Trust), the issuance of the Notes by the Trust and
the closing of the transactions and the execution and delivery of the various documents by General Motors Financial Company, Inc. (f/k/a AmeriCredit Corp.), AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the Servicer) and AFS SenSub Corp. in
connection therewith. The capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.

The undersigned certifies that
I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer. I further certify as follows:



| | 1. | I have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer during the preceding period from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, and its performance under the Agreement.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no default in the
fulfillment of any such obligation.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     |  |                                         |  |  |  |                      
|------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------
|AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. |  |                                         |  | 
|                                     |  |                                         | 
|By:                                  |  | /s/ Connie Coffey                       |  |  |  | Dated: March 30, 2015
|                                     |  |                                         |  |  |  |                      
|                                     |  | Connie Coffey                           |  |  |  |                      
|                                     |  | Executive Vice President, Corporate     |  |  |  |                      
|                                     |  | Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |  |  |  |
Process flow diagram for the processing of the new chemical at sites controlled by the submitter
exv10w68






Exhibit 10.68




AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE




APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.



2005 EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN



     APPLIED MATERIALS, INC., having adopted the Applied Materials, Inc. 2005 Executive Deferred
Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) effective as of January 1, 2005, and having amended and/or restated
the Plan on several occasions, hereby again amends the Plan, as follows:



     1. Effective as of December 8, 2008, Section 1.11 is amended by deleting the phrase “Global
Executive Incentive Plan” therefrom and substituting the phrase “Applied Incentive Plan” therefor.



     2. Effective as of January 1, 2005, the first sentence of Section 3.2 is amended by deleting
the word “last” therefrom.



     3. Section 3.7 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:




     “3.7 Deemed Investment of Accounts. Although no assets will be segregated or
otherwise set aside with respect to a Participant’s Account, the amount that is
ultimately payable to the Participant with respect to his or her Account shall be
determined as if such Account had been invested in such manner as the Committee, in
its sole discretion, may specify from time to time. The Committee, in its sole
discretion, shall adopt (and may modify from time to time) such rules and procedures
as it deems necessary or appropriate to implement the deemed investment of the
Participants’ Accounts. The exact amount to be credited (or debited) as deemed
earnings, gains or losses with respect to any Participant’s Account will be
determined by the Committee under such formulae as the Committee, in its sole
discretion, adopts from time to time.”



     4. The first sentence of Section 4.3 is amended by deleting the phrase “crediting of
deemed interest” therefrom and substituting the phrase “crediting (or debiting) of deemed
earnings, gains or losses” therefor.



 









 





     5. The title of Section 5.8.4 is amended by deleting the word “Interest” therefrom and
substituting the word “Investment” therefor.



     6. The phrase “deemed interest” is deleted and the phrase “deemed earnings, gains or
losses” is substituted therefor everywhere it appears in the Plan.



     7. The phrase “credited with deemed interest” is deleted and the phrase “credited (or
debited) with deemed earnings, gains or losses” is substituted therefor everywhere it
appears in the Plan.



     8. Except as otherwise specified above, this Amendment No. 3 to the restated Plan is
effective as of January 1, 2010.



     In
Witness Whereof, Applied Materials, Inc., by its duly authorized officer, has executed this
Amendment No. 3 to the restated Plan on the date specified below.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Applied Materials, Inc.

 	 
	Dated:  April 26, 2010 	By  	/s/ Ron Miller
 	 
	 	 	Ron Miller 	 
	 	 	Corporate Vice President, Global Rewards 	 
	 




2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION
Tyrone Franklin,
Plaintiff(s),
Case Number: 1:17cv589
vs.
Judge Susan J. Dlott
Timothy Lanter, et al.,
Defendant(s).

ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Stephanie K. Bowman filed on March 2, 2018 (Doc. 12), to whom this case was referred
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the
time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) expired March 16, 2018, hereby
ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc.
11) is DENIED.

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4), plaintiff may file, within thirty (30) days after
service of the Di strict Court’s order adopting the Report and Recommendation, a motion with
the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed as a pauper on appeal, Callihan v.
Schneider, 178 F. 3d 800, 803 (6 Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal
Service, 105 F.3d 274 (6" Cir. 1997). Plaintiff's motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed
in the District Court and this Court’s statement as to the reasons for denying pauper status on

appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).


Plaintiff is notified that if he does not file a motion within thirty days (30) of receiving
notice of the District Court’s decision as required by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5), or fails to pay the
required filing fee of $455.00 within this same time period, the appeal will be dismissed for want
of prosecution. Callihan, 178 F.3d at 804. Once dismissed for want of prosecution, the appeal
will not be reinstated, even if the filing fee or motion for pauper status is subsequently tendered,
unless plaintiff can demonstrate that he did not receive notice of the District Court’s decision
within the time period prescribed for by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).. /d.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Aetian.4 pte

Judge Susan J. Dee
United States District Court
Exhibit 32.1
Tidelands Oil & Gas Corporation
Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)
Chief Financial Officer Certification (Section 906)

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C.,SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350 (as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002),  we,  the  undersigned  President  and Chief
Executive  Officer  and Sr.  Vice  President  and  Chief  Financial  Officer  of
Tidelands Oil & Gas Corporation, (the "Company"), herby certify that to the best
of my  knowledge,  the  Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB of the Company for the
period ended March 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the  requirements
of  section  13(a)  or  15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 and that
information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,
the  financial  condition  and results of  operation  of the  Company.  A signed
original of this written statement  required by Section 906 has been provided to
the  registrant  and will be retained by it and furnished to the  Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


Dated: May 19, 2006

                                     /s/ Michael Ward        /s/ James B. Smith
                                    ------------------      --------------------
                                    President and CEO       Sr. V.P. and CFO
#### WILLOUGHBY v. N. E. R. R. CO.

1. Notice oe Intention to appeal from judgment to be entered up should be served -within *ten*days from adjournment of Court.

2. An APPEAR will not be dismissed for failure to serve the “Case” in time, where the delay is shown to be such excusable default as is contemplated by section 349 of Code.

Motion to dismiss appeal. The case of Ella F. Wil-loughby against the North Eastern Railroad Company was tried at Florence, February term, 1897, before a jury, and resulted in a verdict for defendant. Court adjourned February 6. Notice of intention to appeal from the judgment “entered or to be entered” was served February 13. During the trial of the cause, certain original records were used *373from the county of Williamsburg. By the permission of the Court, the clerk carried these records back to Williams-burg, with the understanding and promise, as plaintiff claims, that defendant’s attorneys would place in the record in Florence certified copies of the Williamsburg record. On March 4, plaintiff’s attorneys served on defendant’s attorneys a notice to file the certified copies of the Williamsburg record, and on same day a notice to enter up judgment. Certified copies of the Williamsburg record were filed March 12. Judgment was entered up March 20. Notice of intention to appeal from judgment entered up was served March 29. Return filed within twenty days after 29th March. “Case” and exceptions served April 24. Motion papers served April 23.

*Messrs. P. A.*Wilcox, *P. M.*Gillam, and *Theo. G.*Barker, for the motion.

*Messrs. W. F. Clayton*and *T. Y.*Williams, contra.

May 12, 1897.

PER Curiam.

The Court, after hearing argument of appellants’ and respondent’s attorneys upon a motion to dismiss the appeal herein, is satisfied that the notice of appeal was served with the *bona fide*intention of appealing to this Court, and that although the appellant failed to comply with the requirements of the statute in the preparation of the case for hearing on appeal, the failure to do so was due to such mistake as is contemplated by section 349 of the Code, and from which he is entitled to relief. '

. It is, therefore, ordered, that the motion to dismiss be, and the same is hereby, refused upon the following terms: That if the defendant so desires, the case shall be set down for hearing by this Court on Thursday, the 10th day of June, 1897, at 6 o’clock p. m. That if the appellant fails to comply with this requirement, the appeal shall be dismissed.
Case: 3:17-cv-00334-TMR Doc #: 14-15 Filed: 04/16/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 299
exv10w2






Exhibit 10.2




FIRST AMENDMENT TO

CONFIDENTIAL LICENSE AGREEMENT

FOR THE Wii CONSOLE

(Western Hemisphere)



THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (“First Amendment”) amends that certain Confidential License Agreement for the
Wii Console (Western Hemisphere) effective February 21, 2007 between Nintendo of America Inc.
(“Nintendo”) and Majesco Entertainment Company (“Licensee”) (“Agreement”).




RECITALS



WHEREAS, Nintendo and Licensee entered into the Agreement;



WHEREAS, the Agreement currently expires on February 20, 2010, and the parties now desire to extend
the Term (as such term is defined in the Agreement) of the Agreement as set forth below.




AMENDMENT



NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:





	1.	 	The definition of “Term” as set forth in Section 2.24 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in
its entirety and replaced with the following:
	 
	 	 	“ ‘Term’ means six (6) years from the Effective Date.”
	 
	2.	 	The Term of the Agreement shall now expire on February 20, 2013.
	 
	3.	 	All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This
First Amendment may be signed in counterparts, which together shall constitute one original
First Amendment.
	 
	4.	 	Signatures provided by facsimile or by email (i.e., a scanned document) shall be the
equivalent of originals.




This First Amendment shall be effective as of January 4, 2010.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this First Amendment.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 

	NINTENDO:	 	LICENSEE:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Nintendo of America Inc.	 	Majesco Entertainment Company	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ James R. Cannataro
	 	By:
	 	/s/ Adam Sultan	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Name: James R. Cannataro
	 	 	 	Name: Adam Sultan	 	 
	 

	 	Its: EVP, Administration
	 	 	 	Its: SVP, GC
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 2 of 15 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 3 of 15 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 4 of 15 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 5 of 15 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 6 of 15 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 7 of 15 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 8 of 15 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 9 of 15 PAGEID #: 9
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 10 of 15 PAGEID #: 10
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 11 of 15 PAGEID #: 11
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 12 of 15 PAGEID #: 12
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 13 of 15 PAGEID #: 13
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 14 of 15 PAGEID #: 14
Case: 3:17-mj-00473-MJN Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/11/17 Page: 15 of 15 PAGEID #: 15
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-8464 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NM-050-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

CMR Task: 

Operational Check 

of the Propeller 

Overspeed 

Governor

0.3 $ 25.50 $0 $ 25.50 82 $2,091.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $2,091

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

0.5 $ 42.50 3 $ 42.50

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00
Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
       (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
 (c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and
 (d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 (b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date:  February 12, 2010
    /s/ Brendan J. McGillBrendan J. McGillExecutive Vice-President and
Chief Financial Officer
#### The People on the relation of John R. Taylor v. The Judge of the St. Clair Circuit.

*Circuit courts: JSwpei'visory jurisdiction: Inferior tribmials: Certiorari: Proceedings before commissioner to dissolve attachment*Circuit courts have, under the constitution *(Art. VI,*§ S), a general supervisory control, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court, over inferior courts and. tribunals; and they may issue a common-law *certiorari*to bring up for review proceedings before a circuit court c.ommissioner for the dissolution of an attachment.

*Submitted on briefs and decided April 30.*

Application for *Mandamus.*

Eelator commenced suit by attachment against one Marcus Young in the St. Clair circuit. Young, after having moved the court to quash the proceedings for insufficiency of the affidavit and failed in his motion, applied to the circuit court commissioner of the county to dissolve the attachment, and the commissioner dissolved it for insufficiency of the affidavit in form. The relator thereupon applied to the circuit judge for a *certiorari*to review the proceedings before the commissioner, which writ was granted. When the cause came on for hearing, however, the circuit judge declined to hear it on the ground of want of jurisdiction. The relator applies for *mandamus*to require the respondent to reinstate the cause and hear and determine it on its merits, and makes a showing of the above facts, and also that the commissioner’s term had since expired, and that he was not reelected, and that for that reason, as the relator is advised, he is prevented from suing out a new writ of *certiorari.*

*Chadwick &*Potter, for relator.

*Atkinson Bros.,*for respondent.

Pee OueiaM:

This case is ruled by *Thompson v. School District No. 6 of Crockery, 25 Mich., 483.*

The writ must issue.
Unassociated Document


Exhibit 10.8 Certificate of Merger



 


CERTIFICATE OF MERGER


 


OF


 


CELESTIAL JETS INC. and CELESTIAL ACQUISITION CORP. into CELESTIAL ACQUISITION CORP.


 


Under Section 904 of the Business Corporation Law


 


________________________________________________________________________


 


I, the undersigned Gary Clyburn, Jr., being the President of Celestial Jets Inc. and Celestial Acquisition Corp. hereby certify:


 



	
FIRST:

	
(a) The names of the corporations are Celestial Acquisition Corp. and Celestial Jets Inc.


	 	 
	  	
(b) The name of the surviving corporation is Celestial Acquisition Corp. and following the merger its name will be Celestial Jets Inc.


	 	 
	
SECOND:

	
As to each constituent corporation, the designation and number of outstanding shares of each class and series and the voting rights thereof are as follows:


	 	 
	  	
Celestial Jets Inc. has 200 outstanding shares of common stock which are entitled to 1 vote per share.


	 	 
	  	
Celestial Acquisition Corp. has 1 outstanding share of common stock which is entitled to 1 vote.


	 	 
	
THIRD:

	
The date when the certificate of incorporation of each constituent corporation was filed by the Department of State is as follows:







 



	  	
Name of Corporation

	
Date of Incorporation


	 	 	 
	  	
Celestial Acquisition Corp.

	
May 21, 2010.


	 	 	 
	  	
Celestial Jets Inc.

	
February 13, 2009.







 



	
FOURTH:

	
The merger was adopted by each constituent corporation in the following manner:


	 	 
	  	
(a)

	
as to Celestial Acquisition Corp., by the unanimous written consent of all the stockholders;


	 	 	 
	  	
(b)

	
as to Celestial Jets Inc., by the unanimous written consent of all the stockholders.


	 	 	 
	
FIFTH:

	
The merger shall be effective as of the 11th day of June, 2010.


	 	 
	


	








 




  





  











  




 




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed his name this 11TH day of June, 2010.


 



	
Celestial Acquisition Corp.

	  	
Celestial Jets Inc.


	 	 	 	 	 
	
By:

	
/s/ Gary Clyburn, Jr.

	  	
By:

	
/s/ Gary Clyburn, Jr.


	  	
Gary Clyburn, Jr., President

	  	  	
Gary Clyburn, Jr., President