alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PROTOCOL SYSTEMS, INC.

                        AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

PARTIES:    Protocol Systems, Inc. ("Company")
            8500 SW Creekside Place
            Beaverton, OR 97008

            James P. Welch ("Executive")
            14340 SW Hazelhill
            Tigard, OR 97224

DATE: March 1, 2000

                                        RECITALS:

     A.    The Company and the Executive have entered into an Executive
Employment Agreement dated as of July 1, 1998 (the "Employment Agreement").

     B.    The Company and the Executive now desire to modify certain
provisions of the Employment Agreement.

     NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

     1.    Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein have their
defined meanings as set forth in the Employment Agreement.

     2.    Section 2.3 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     2.3 TERM. This Agreement shall remain in effect until the earlier of (i)
     termination pursuant to Article 4 or Article 6 of this Agreement or (ii)
     three (3) years from the date of this Agreement, provided however that if
     a Change of Control occurs within three (3) years from the date of this
     Agreement, then this Agreement shall remain in effect for two (2) years
     from the date of the first Change of Control event described in Section
     6.1.1.

     3.    Section 6.2.1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     6.2.1 Change of Control Termination Payment.  In the event of a Change of
     Control Termination as defined in Section 6.1.2, without further action by
     the Board, the Company shall, within thirty (30) days of such termination,
     make a lump sum payment to the Executive, equal to two (2) years' Base
     Salary.

     4.    Section 6.5 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     6.5 Vesting of Stock Options. All unvested stock options held by
     Executive, if any, shall vest immediately upon a Change of Control
     Termination as defined in Section 6.1.2. Executive may exercise such
     options in accordance with the terms and conditions of the stock option
     plan and the agreement pursuant to which such options were granted.

     5.    Except as set forth and amended and restated herein, the Employment
Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to Executive
Employment Agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first written
above.

EXECUTIVE                                 PROTOCOL SYSTEMS, INC.


_____________________________________     By:___________________________________
James P. Welch                            Title:________________________________
Exhibit















February 19, 2019




Perry Pericleous
1 Express Drive
Columbus, Ohio 43230


Re: Special Cash Retention Award 


Dear Perry:


Express, LLC (the "Company") is pleased to offer you a special cash retention award ("Award") in the amount of $100,000, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. If you choose to accept the Award, the Company will pay you $100,000, less applicable tax withholdings, at the Company's next scheduled payroll date following your execution of this letter agreement.


As a condition to receiving the Award, you hereby agree that in the event you voluntarily terminate your employment with the Company on or prior to February 19, 2020 without Good Reason (as defined in your Confidentiality, Non-competition and Intellectual Property Agreement), or your employment is terminated by the Company with Cause  (as defined  in your Confidentiality, Non-competition and Intellectual Property Agreement), then you shall repay to the Company $100,000 within ten calendar days of your last day of employment  with the Company.


This letter agreement shall be governed by, and construed under and in accordance with, the internal laws of the State of Ohio. This Award shall not be taken into account in computing the amount of salary or compensation for purposes of determining any bonus, incentive, retirement, death or other benefit under any other bonus, incentive, retirement, insurance or other employee benefit plan of the Company, unless such plan or agreement expressly provides  otherwise.


Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.


If you wish to accept this Award, please sign as indicated below by February 22, 2019 and return this document to me.




Katie Maurer
Senior Vice President - Human Resources
Express, LLC




Acknowledged and agreed:


___________________________________________
Perry Pericleous                Date
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

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

    I, Russell P. Fradin, the Chief Executive Officer of The BISYS Group, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of
the Company for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the "Form 10-Q"),
which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:   November 8, 2004

                                                /s/ Russell P. Fradin
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Russell P. Fradin

<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

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

    I, James L. Fox, the Chief Financial Officer of The BISYS Group, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of
the Company for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the "Form 10-Q"),
which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:   November 8, 2004

                                                     /s/ James L. Fox
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     James L. Fox
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

 

I, Stuart A. Tashlik, ChiefFinancial Officer of The FINOVA Group Inc., certify that: 

 

1.               Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The FINOVA Group Inc.;

 

2.               Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.               Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

a)              Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)              Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b)             Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date:  November 10, 2003 | /s/ Stuart A. Tashlik    |
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|                     | Stuart A.  Tashlik       |
|                     | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
Raymond NORTH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2892

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Stephanie HARRIS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Roman Valerievich GOLOVIN and Viktoriia Golovina, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1940

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

SEPTEMBER 26, 2017

Upon the Court's own motion, it is ordered that this appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Florida is dismissed for failure to comply with this Court's order dated August 31, 2017, and with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.

ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SUAREZ and SALTER, JJ., concur.
Richard PLUMER II, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1863

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted. Dismissed.

Denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Umbrella Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30 2002 as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank
J. Shinnick, Principal Accounting and Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

(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.

/s/ Frank J. Shinnick

Frank J. Shinnick
Principal Accounting and Financial Officer
November 19, 2002
Roy Edwards STEPHENS, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-4402

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
D'Vontai Akeem Jamar KINNEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3969

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 6, 2018 Rehearing Denied April 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Transport Transports Canada Canada TP 7245E



# AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your na me. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X . Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H , the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard

. This AD has been issued b y the Continuin g Airworthiness Division ( AARDG ) , National Aircraft Certification Branch, Trans p ort Canada, Ottawa, tele p hone 613 952-4357.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister in writing of any change of his or her name or address. To request a change of address, contact the Civil Aviation Communicat ions Centre (AARC) at Place de Ville, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8 , or 1-800-305-2059 , or www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/communications/centre/ addr ess.asp 2 4-0022 ( 01-2005 ) 1/1 No

. CF-2013-38 Issue Date 28 November 2013

Number: CF-2013-38 Subject: Design Deficiency of the Nose Wheel Steering Control Unit Effective: 12 December 2013 Applicability: Bombardier Inc. model DHC-8- 400, -401 and -402 aeroplanes, serial numbers 4001 through 4448. Compliance: Within 2000 flight cycles or 12 months , whichever occurs first, from the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished. Background: There has been one in-service report of an un-commanded and un-annunciated nose wheel steering during aeroplane push-back from t he gate. The investi gation revealed that a design deficiency exists within the steer ing control unit (SCU) where an open circuit may not be adequately detected and annunciated to the flight crew. A sustained open circuit could result in an un-commanded and un-annunciated nose wheel steering input. Un-commanded nose wheel steering during tak eoff or landing may lead to a runway excursion. This AD mandates the installation of new cabl e assemblies, with a pull-down resistor, to ensure that the nose wheel steer ing system reverts to fail-safe free castor mode in the event of an open circuit in the steering system. Corrective Actions: Incorporate Bombardier Modsum 4-126585. Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 84-32-122, Revision A, dated 4 October 2013, or later revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing A irworthiness, Transport Canada, provides approved instructions for incorporating Modsum 4-126585. Incorporation of Modsum 4-126585 in accordanc e with the Initial Issue of SB 84-32-122, dated 28 August 2013, also satisfies the requirements of this AD. Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Derek Ferguson Chief, Continuing Airworthiness Contact: Robert Farinas, Continuing Airworthine ss, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 613-996-9178 or e-mail AD-CN@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

IN RE: DAVOL, INC./ C.R. BARD, 

INC. POLYPROPYLENE HERNIA

MESH PRODUCTS LIABILITY

LITIGATION 

NOTICE

 Case No. 2:18-md-2846

 JUDGE EDMUND A SARGUS, JR. 

 Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

This notice relates to: ALL CASES.

TAKE NOTICE that a proceeding in this case has been set for the place, date, and time set forth 

below:

Place: United States District Court Judge Sargus’ Chambers 

 Joseph P. Kinneary U.S. Courthouse 3rd Floor, Jury Room

85 Marconi Boulevard October 4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. 

 Columbus, Ohio 43215 

TYPE OF PROCEEDING: IN-PERSON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

(This conference is for defense counsel and PSC attorneys.)

EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

DATE: August 17, 2022

 /s / Christin M. Werner 

(By) Christin M. Werner, Deputy Clerk

 

Case: 2:18-md-02846-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 655 Filed: 08/17/22 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 7959
#### UNITED STATES *of*America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lavonte Lamont HALLMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-6306

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 27, 2017

Decided: July 31, 2017

Lavonte Lamont Hallman, Appellant Pro Se. John George Guise, COPELAND RICHARDS, Davidson, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lavonte Lamont Hallman appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. Hallman challenges his career offender designation based on *Johnson v. United States,*— U.S.-, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), which declared the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act unconstitutionally vague.* Hallman’s argument *131is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s recent decision that the Sentencing Guidelines, including the career offender residual clause, “are not subject to a vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause.” *Beckles v. United States,*— U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 892, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*

*

**Before this court, Hallman clarifies that he believes he is entitled to relief under our decisions in *United States v. Gardner,*823 F.3d 793 (4th Cir. 2016), and *United States v. Billups,*652 Fed.Appx. 157 (4th Cir. 2016). These cases do not apply to Hallman as they address *131armed career criminal designations under the Armed Career Criminal Act, not career offender designations.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TYRONE GRANT,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 365 EAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29th day of November, 2016

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.

Justices Donohue and Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision

of this matter.
Lewis P. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3769

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 1, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 23.1










Consent Of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 No. 333-122044 of Salon Media Group, Inc. of our report (which contains an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern as described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements) dated June 25, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Salon Media Group, Inc. and subsidiaries, which appears in this Form 10-K.











/s/ Burr Pilger Mayer, Inc.


San Francisco, California


June 25, 2010
Exhibit 21

RENTRAK CORPORATION & SUBSIDIARIES



|                                               |  |               
|---------------------------------------------- |  | --------------
|ENTITY                                         |  | DOMICILE      
|                                               | 
|Rentrak Corporation                            |  | Oregon        
|                                               | 
|Domestic Subsidiaries                          |  |               
|Rentrak Latin American Stockholder, LLC        |  | Delaware      
|                                               | 
|Foreign Subsidiaries                           |  |               
|Rentrak Canada, Inc.                           |  | Canada        
|Rentrak Cayman Corporation                     |  | Cayman Islands
|Rentrak C.V.                                   |  | Netherlands   
|Rentrak B.V.                                   |  | Netherlands   
|Rentrak Australia Pty Ltd                      |  | Australia     
|Rentrak Argentina SRL                          |  | Argentina     
|Rentrak France SAS                             |  | France        
|Rentrak Germany GmbH                           |  | Germany       
|Rentrak Corporation Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. |  | Mexico        
|Rentrak Spain SL                               |  | Spain         
|Rentrak Brazil Pesquisa De Mercado             |  | Brazil        
|Rentrak Holdings UK Limited                    |  | United Kingdom
|Rentrak Limited                                |  | United Kingdom
Consent of Patrice Live





I consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of New Gold Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of reference to my name in connection with, and to the use of information derived from, the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Feasibility Study of the Rainy River Project, Ontario, Canada” effective date January 16, 2014, included in the Annual Information Form of New Gold Inc. for the financial year ended December 31, 2013, and I consent to the incorporation by reference of such information in the registration statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-160500) of New Gold Inc.








Dated this 28th day of March, 2014








“Patrice Live”Name:
Patrice Live, Eng.Title:
Manager of Mining
Michael S. MALLOR, Appellant, v. JP MORGAN CHASE, Successor In Interest To EMC Mortgage Corporation, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3392

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 8, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*