alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1.8





Exhibit 10.1.8




January 30, 2009




Mr. Charles Elliott

Chief Financial Officer

Roberts Properties Residential, L.P.

450 Northridge Parkway

Suite 302

Atlanta, Georgia 30350




	 	 	 
	Re:

	 	Lease Renewal Option for 450 Northridge Parkway, Suite 300






Dear Charles:



Please accept this letter as the required notice of Tenant’s exercise of its final one (1) year
option to extend the Lease dated March 27, 2006 by and between Roberts Properties Residential,
L.P., a Georgia limited partnership (“Landlord”) and Roberts Properties, Inc., a Georgia
corporation (“Tenant”) (the “Lease”).



We are exercising our option and we will abide by its terms that the Base Rent of the Extension
Term shall not be less than the Base Rent at the expiration of the applicable Lease Term.
Therefore, the rental rate will be $20.00 per sq. ft. and the Term shall be extended to December
31, 2009. Except as expressly stated herein, all other terms and conditions of the Lease shall
remain in full force and effect.



However, it should be noted that the current office rental market is soft and new leases at 450
Northridge Parkway will probably be in the $17.00 — $18.00 per square foot range. The effective
rental rate will be even lower given the need to provide tenant build out work for any new leases.
Based on the current market, our Base Rent of $20.00 per square foot is more than you could get
from a replacement tenant.



I would appreciate your acknowledging the above terms and conditions and returning an executed copy
of this Lease Extension to me.



	 	 	 	 	 
	Sincerely,

	 	AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED:
	 	 
	 

	 	Roberts Properties Residential, L.P.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Anthony Shurtz

	 	/s/ Charles Elliott	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Anthony Shurtz

	 	Charles Elliott, Chief Financial Officer	 	 
	Chief Financial Officer

	 	Roberts Realty Investors, Inc.,	 	 
	 

	 	Sole General Partner	 	 






Roberts Properties, Inc. 450 Northridge Parkway / Suite 300 / Atlanta, GA 30350 / (770) 394-6000 / Fax 396-0706
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          13,808
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          36,753
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,073,914
<ALLOWANCE>                                   (73,969)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,276,004
<DEPOSITS>                                     563,834
<SHORT-TERM>                                    95,020
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            332,303
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           273
<OTHER-SE>                                     284,574
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,276,004
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                105,956
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  960
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 2,711
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               109,627
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              17,192
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,059
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           77,568
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   47,972
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                136,536
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 31,217
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      19,727
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,727
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.72
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                    58,241
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                79,726
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   68,579
<RECOVERIES>                                    12,695
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               73,969
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            73,969
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROGER QUINN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

JOANNE KIBODEAUX,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 20

- 36070

D.C. No. 1:20

- cv

- 00291

- DCN

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

David C . Nye, District Judge , Presiding

Submitted February 17, 2021 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ, BYBEE and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Roger Quinn appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dis missing his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims relat ed to a family court proceeding . We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the application of

abstention under Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37 (1971)

. R eadyLink Healthcare,

* 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

FEB 22 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 36070

Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund , 754 F.3d 754, 758 (9th Cir. 20 14 ). We affirm.

T he district court properly dismissed Quinn’s action as barred under the

Younger abstention doctrine because federal courts are required to abstain from

inter f eri ng with pending state court proceedings where “the federal action would

have the practical effect of enjoining the state proceedings.” Id . at 758

- 59 (setting

forth requirements for Younger abstention in civil cases, and explaining that “the

date for deter mining whether Younger applies is the date the federal action is filed”

(citation and internal quotation marks omitted)) ; H.C. ex rel. Gordon v. Koppel

,

203 F.3d 610, 61 2

- 14 (9th Cir. 2000) ( explaining that Younger abstention is

appropriate where federal action seeks to challenge ongoing state child custody

proceedings ).

Quinn’s m otion for t emporary i njunction p ending a ppeal (Docket Entry No s

.

9 and 10 ) is denied.

AFFIRMED.
#### Pulse *v.*McGregor.

Opinion delivered June 3, 1929.

*Jonas F. Dyson,*for appellant.

*Ross Mathis,*for appellee.

*713Butler, J.

The appellant, Pulse, was the owner of two twenty-acre tracts of land in section 15, township 5 north, range 2 west, in Woodruff County, Arkansas, one being the west half of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter and the other the south half of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter. A judgment was rendered against Pulse in an action for debt, an execution was issued and levied on the west twenty, which was in due time sold by the sheriff, and his deed issued to the purchaser after the time for redemption from sale had expired. Pulse, the judgment debtor, brought this suit, alleging that the lands levied upon and sold were a part of his homestead, and that the deed executed by the sheriff was a cloud upon his title, and prayed for its cancellation.

The two twenty-acre tracts mentioned are all the lands owned by Pulse. His dwelling is situated on the east twenty, near its western boundary, and there are a few acres cleared on that tract, the remainder being wet and unfit for cultivation. Pulse is a farmer, and the greater part of the land which he cultivated was on the west twenty. The chancellor denied his prayer for cancellation and dismissed his bill for want of equity, and he has appealed.

At an early date in the history of this court Mr. Chief Justice ENglish, speaking for the court, defined a homestead as that “part of a man’s land and property which is about and contiguous to his dwelling- house.” *Tumlinson*v. Swinney, 22 Ark. 400. That definition has been adhered to and reiterated from time to time by this court, without any exception having been made, and in the case of *McCroskey*v. *Walker,*55 Ark. 303, 18 S. W. 109, Mr. Chief Justice Cockrill, after having reviewed the decisions of this court, held that a homestead could not be claimed in noncontiguous lands.

The appellant cites the case of *Stuckey*v. *Horn,*132 Ark. 357, 200 S. W. 1025, as holding contrary to the rule announced in *McCroskey*v. *Walker, supra;*but in that *714case the homestead right had attached before it was separated by the railroad right-of-way which ran across the tract of land, thus separating it. Moreover, the fee to the land occupied by the railroad as its right-of-way never passed from the homestead owner, the railroad only having acquired an easement therein. Thus the fee remained whole and undivided in the owner. The facts in the case of *McCroskey*v. *Walker, supra,*and in the instant case are much alike; in the one, the tracts of land were separated by a distance of a mile, and in the case now under consideration by a distance of three-eighths of a mile.

We think, on the authority of the decisions referred to, the decree of the chancellor is correct, and it is affirmed.
Aaron HAMILTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3579

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2018 Rehearing Denied April 20, 2018

Aaron Hamilton, Cross City, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See**Rusaw v. State* , 451 So.2d 469, 470 (Fla. 1984) ; *State v. Young* , 579 So.2d 380 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).

TORPY, WALLIS and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
4.5

     

    Extension
of Amended and Restated Commtouch Software Ltd. 1999 Non-Employee Directors
Stock Option Plan

     

    At the
annual meeting of shareholders of the Company held on December 15, 2008,
shareholders approved the extension of the Company’s Amended and Restated 1999
Nonemployee Directors Stock Option Plan until July 13, 2019.
Exhibit 12.1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


           We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-10002), of our report dated March 4,
2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Carmel Container
Systems, Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended
December 31, 2002.






                                      /s/  KOST, FORER and GABBAY
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                      KOST, FORER and GABBAY
                                      A member of Ernst & Young International

Tel-Aviv, Israel
June 20, 2003
From: Ungvarsky, John

To: Ungvarsky, John

Subject: Ferreria email re requests for ARB to flag data in AQS for 2013 and 2014

Date: Monday, May 16, 2016 7:15:17 PM

Attachments: image001.png

From: Shawn Ferreria [ mailto:Shawn.Ferreria@valleyair.org ]

Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:21 PM

To: Najita, Theresa@ARB

Cc: Jon Klassen

Subject: RE: District requests ARB to flag data in AQS for 2013 and 2014

The valley experienced the strongest recorded atmospheric stability over the past 15 years during the fall 2013 and winter 2014. This

stable pattern effectively trapped pollutants and caused elevated particulate concentrations. Climate conditions caused by this type of

weather pattern resulted in historically dry and poor air quality conditions in the San Joaquin Valley and other parts of California.

From: Shawn Ferreria

Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:18 PM

To: tnajita@arb.ca.gov

Cc: Jon Klassen; 'webster.tasat@arb.ca.gov'

Subject: District requests ARB to flag data in AQS for 2013 and 2014

Importance: High

Good Afternoon Theresa,

As referenced in the attached June 5, 2015 letter, the District intended to pursue the following data points as potential exceptional event

days. The San Joaquin Valley APCD is requesting ARB to flag the following in AQS as RL-other

.

Event Description:

The valley experienced the strongest recorded atmospheric stability over the past 15 years during the fall 2013 and winter 2014. This

stable pattern effectively trapped pollutants and caused elevated particulate concentrations. Climate conditions caused by this type of

weather pattern resulted in historically dry and poor air quality conditions in the San Joaquin Valley and other parts of California. The

historic strength and longevity of this high pressure system resulted in a lack of rainfall especially in central and southern California,

leading to a third consecutive year of below average rainfall totals during the 2013 calendar year.

Date Site Name AQS ID Parameter

Code POC Concentration

(μg/m3) Flag Requested

18-Dec-13 Hanford 06-031-1004 81102 1 177 RL

- Other (Drought)

Visalia-Church Street 06-107-2002 81102 2 155 RL

- Other (Drought)

21-Jan-14 Bakersfield-California Avenue 06-029-0014 81102 7 158.5 RL

- Other (Drought)

Date Site Name AQS ID Parameter

Code POC Concentration

(μg/m3) Flag Requested

17-Dec-13 Bakersfield-California Avenue* 06-029-0014 81102 7 237 RL

- Other (Drought)

18-Dec-13 Bakersfield-California Avenue* 06-029-0014 81102 7 184 RL

- Other (Drought)

*-ARB is currently investigating if the Bakersfield-California Avenue December 17 and 18, 2013 PM10 data is going to be uploaded into AQS. If

so, ARB would also need to flag these data points.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,



# Shawn Ferreria

Senior Air Quality Specialist

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

1990 East Gettysburg Avenue

Fresno, CA 93726

Office: (559) 230-5823, Forecaster Desk: (559) 230-5826, Fax: (559) 230-6064
EX PARTE Edward FEARS

CR-16-0186

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Ct. of Civ. App.
# lnvento~ExperlServke A division of the American Chemical Society Phone : 800-631-1884, 614-447-3870 Fax: 614-447-3747 E-mail: answers @ cas.org Web: www.cas.orgfproductsfother-cas-productsfclient-servicesf


# INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT

IES Order Number: 367762 Registry Number: 1476777-83-9 CA 

### Index Name: Alcohols, C12-22, distn. residues Definition: The residuum from the distillation of the products from the catalytic hydrogenation of mixed fatty acids. It 

### consists predominantly of C12 through C24 alcohols and C24 through C46 esters. It 

### boils in the range of greater than 210°C (410°F) at 3.75 mm Hg.

CAS Please print the above CA Index Name on the appropriate page of your PMN. If this box is checked, CAS has made correct ion(s) marked in red to your IE S order. Please make the same corrections to your PMN before submitt in g it to the EPA. 2540 Ole ntangy River Road P.

### 0. Box 3343 Colum bus, OH 4321 0-0334 USA
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report of MartenTransport, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), each of the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best knowledge of the undersigned:

 

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

 

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

 
| Date:  March 15, 2010 | /s/ Randolph L.  Marten  |
|----------------------------|--------------------------|
|                       | Randolph L.  Marten      |
|                       | Chief Executive  Officer |
|                       |                     |
|                       |                     |
|                       | /s/ James J.  Hinnendael |
|                       | James J.  Hinnendael     |
|                       | Chief Financial  Officer |

 

----
S.R.B., Appellant, v. AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATION, Appellee.

Case No. 2D15-4753

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 28, 2018

William H. Rogner and Jason Lazarus, Winter Park, for Appellant.

Alexander R. Boler, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, BLACK, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
SUBJ: Airport Deicing Rule

‐ Meeting with ACI and ATA

FROM: Jan Matuszko

TO: Record

DATE: 9/1/11

At the request of the Airports Council International

‐ North America (ACI) and the Air Transport

Association (ATA), on August 31, 2011, Nancy Stoner, Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of

Water met with representatives of ACI and ATA to discuss the Airport Deicing Effluent Limitation

Guideline (ELG) rulemaking. See attachment A for a list of the attendees.

ACI and ATA discussed some of the overarching concerns they had with the proposed rule. They

indicated their concerns were specific to the aircraft deicing requirements and not the airfield pavement

deicing requirements. These concerns included:

 They do not believe there is a need for this ELG, as the industry has been working towards

reducing their discharges, and where water quality concerns exist, the discharge permits have

been adjusted accordingly on an airport

‐ specific basis.

 A “One size fits all” approach is not appropriate, as every airport is different. There is a need for

a site

‐ specific approach.

 The need for flexibility in implementing the requirements

 The need for “credit” towards the collection requirement for pollution prevention activities.

Specifically, they noted pollution prevention had been a focus of their efforts to reduce aircraft

deicing fluid (ADF) discharges and specifically cited reduced fluid usage associated with new

equipment that reduces the amount of ADF sprayed in half, blending for ambient temperature

conditions, forced air nozzles, warmed ADF, and ADF with lower BOD content.

 EPA has undercosted this rule, particularly with respect to storage.

 The technologies EPA cited in the proposal don’t achieve the required collection percentage

–

even at the model facilities.

 Feasibility concerns associated with possible technologies. Specifically mentioned plug and

pump and concerns about infiltration and concern that system may overfill before they can

vaccum out the collected fluid, particularly during rain events

 ADF from defrost deicing operations can not be collected.

 EPA should regulate BOD and not COD

 EPA has not provided adequate notice and comment if it selects plug and pump as the

technology basis. because EPA rejected it in the proposal

 50% of the pollution reductions are associated with airfield pavement deicing yet 95% of the

costs are associated with aircraft deicing

EPA asked whether ATA and ACI had any specific alternative proposed suggestions to address these

concerns, but ATA and ACI did not have any suggestions to offer. Rather, they requested an open,

further dialogue with EPA to jointly come up with resolutions.
Michael Steven CAMPBELL v. STATE

CR-15-1468

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Raymond Obrian TYSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4566

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 6, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Ray, and Makar, JJ., concur.
William GALARZA, Appellant, v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON f/k/a Bank of New York as Trustee FOR the CERTIFICATEHOLDERS, CWABS, INC., ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATE SERIES 2007-6, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1772

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 27, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

DISABILITY RIGHTS OHIO,

 Plaintiff,

 v. 

THE BUCKEYE RANCH, INC.,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-894

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-906

Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion to Redact Portions 

of the Transcript of the Hearing Testimony of Robert Peters. (“Motion,” ECF No. 65.) In its 

Motion, Plaintiff seeks to redact “medical and mental health information concerning children 

residing at Buckeye Ranch, and information such as client and report numbers and the names of 

referring agencies that may identify children.” (Motion at 3, ECF No. 65.)

Based on Plaintiff’s representations, the Court concludes that the transcript of Robert 

Peters’ testimony contains confidential information that should be shielded from public access. 

The sealing of documents, however, must be no broader than necessary. See Shane Group, Inc. v. 

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich., 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (“‘The public has an interest 

in ascertaining what evidence and records the District Court and this Court have relied upon in 

reaching our decisions’” (quoting Brown, 710 F.2d at 1181)). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion is 

GRANTED (ECF No. 65). The transcript shall remain under seal. If either party intends to rely 

upon the transcript of Mr. Peters’ testimony, they may file a redacted version on the public docket 

that redacts only the information protected as confidential.

Case: 2:18-cv-00894-EAS-CMV Doc #: 66 Filed: 06/25/19 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 886
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Chelsey M. Vascura

CHELSEY M. VASCURA

UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case: 2:18-cv-00894-EAS-CMV Doc #: 66 Filed: 06/25/19 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 887