alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.8

                                STOUT PARTNERSHIP
                                 101 JESSUP AVE.
                         THOROUGHFARE, NEW JERSEY 08086

May 29, 2002

U.S. Plastic Lumber Corp.
2300 W. Glades Road
Suite 440 W
Boca Raton, FL  33431
Attn:  Bruce C. Rosetto

         Re:      Conversion of $5.0 million Debenture due July 1, 2003
                  (the "Stout Debenture")

Gentlemen:

         Upon the receipt of due and adequate consideration, the receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, and subject to the receipt of stockholder
approval, we hereby agree to convert the Stout Debenture (including $183,310 of
accrued interest thereon) as of May 29, 2002, as required by the terms of the
Bank of America term sheet related to the $10.0 million Senior Secured Credit
Facility, at an exercise price of $0.26 per share, which represents the lowest
closing price during the four trading days prior to May 29, 2002.

         Pursuant to the terms of the Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement
dated December 1, 2000 (the "Debenture Agreement"), no conversion shall occur
absent the receipt of stockholder approval for the conversion of the Stout
Debenture and related warrants. The conversion of the Stout Debenture is further
conditioned upon the closing of the Clean Earth Sale Transaction.

         This letter shall also constitute notice of Stout's intention to
convert pursuant to Section 5(d) of the Stout Debenture and we waive the right
to receive shares within two days as required by the terms of the Stout
Debenture. A copy of the conversion notice is attached hereto.

         The Stout Partnership, through the date hereof, agrees to waive the
past defaults of the Company.

         Nothing in this letter shall be construed as requiring the exercise of
the warrants to purchase shares of USPL common stock issued to Stout. Further,
Stout hereby advises you that it does not intend to exercise its warrants at
this time.

         Kindly acknowledge your consent to the terms of this letter by signing
this letter where indicated below and returning it to me.

                                   Sincerely,

                                   STOUT PARTNERSHIP

                                   By: /s/ GARY J. ZIEGLER
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                      GARY J. ZIEGLER, General Partner


Agreed to and accepted
this __________ day of
June, 2002.

U.S. PLASTIC LUMBER CORP.

By:  /s/ BRUCE C. ROSETTO
    ---------------------------------
         Bruce C. Rosetto, Executive
         Vice President and Secretary
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7048

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

COREY ELMO WELKER,

Defendant - Appellant,

THE ESTATE OF LORIN J. WELKER, A/K/A LORIN J.

WELKER,

Garnishee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, District Judge.

(CR-00-76)

Submitted: November 20, 2001 Decided: December 3, 2001

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Corey Elmo Welker, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Anthony Exley, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Corey Elmo Welker appeals the district court’s orders denying

his motion to dismiss a writ of garnishment and entering garnishment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Welker, No. CR-00-

76 (E.D. Va. May 30 & June 5, 2001). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Earnings as reported on the third quarter Form 10-Q and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements

</LEGEND>


<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            JAN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               AUG-02-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                           250,000
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    167,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                    3,256,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,752,000
<PP&E>                                         5,791,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,586,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,890,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,317,000
<BONDS>                                          817,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                          30,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,311,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,890,000
<SALES>                                        6,234,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               6,234,000
<CGS>                                          4,638,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 483,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                72,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (595,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (153,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (442,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (442,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (1.64)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (1.64)
        


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Metrick Lawan JENKINS, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-1876

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: October 2, 2017

Filed: October 24, 2017

Mikaela Jo Shotwell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Metrick Lawan Jenkins, Pro Se

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Metrick Lawan Jenkins directly appeals the below-Guidelines-range sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses. Jenkins’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the district court erred in denying a down*864ward departure or variance based on overstatement of Jenkins’s criminal history. Jenkins has filed a pro se brief that appears to raise the same arguments.

We lack authority to review the district court’s denial of a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(b)(l) because the district court recognized its authority to depart, and Jenkins does not contend that the court had any unconstitutional motive. See United States v. Heath, 624 F.3d 884, 888 (8th Cir. 2010) (this court generally will not review decision not to'grant downward departure, unless district court had unconstitutional motive or erroneously thought it was without authority to grant departure). To the extent Jenkins argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (under substantive reasonableness review, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we. affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

, The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of James Pallas, Appellant, against Misericordia Hospital, Employer, and State Insurance Fund, Respondent. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

Argued October 7, 1943;

decided November 18, 1943.

*693
      *Harold I. Cohen, Jay Emanuel*and *Harvey B. Ehrlich*for appellant.

*George J. Hayes*and *William F. O’Rourke*for State Insurance Fund, respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: C.R., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.C.

- R., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 245 EAL 2022

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

IN THE INTEREST OF: C.A.R., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.C.

- R., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 246 EAL 2022

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

IN THE INTEREST OF: T.R., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.C.

- R., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 247 EAL 2022

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

IN THE INTEREST OF: T.A.R., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.C.

- R., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 248 EAL 2022

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 1st day of November, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
Exhibit 11 - Statement Regarding Computation of Earnings Per Share


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31    NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31
                                            --------------------------    --------------------------   
                                                1997           1996           1997           1996
                                            -----------    -----------    -----------    -----------
<S>                                           <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>      
PRIMARY:

Average shares outstanding                    3,695,000      1,967,100      3,695,000      1,839,050

Net effect of stock and
warrant issuances with exercise 
prices below the initial
public offering price based 
on the treasury stock method                       --          151,650           --          151,650
                                            -----------    -----------    -----------    -----------

Total                                         3,695,000      2,118,750      3,695,000      1,990,700
                                            ===========    ===========    ===========    ===========

Net loss                                    $(1,368,818)   $  (888,528)   $(3,473,198)   $(1,797,794)
                                            ===========    ===========    ===========    ===========

Per share amount                            $     (0.37)         (0.42)   $     (0.94)   $     (0.90)
                                            ===========    ===========    ===========    ===========
</TABLE>
CERTIFICATIONI, Kokmeng Koh, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K ofPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 2006-86 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and otherinformation required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by thisreport is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required inthis report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct period reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 28, 2007   /s/ Kokmeng Koh     Kokmeng Koh  Second Vice President
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.11

                               POLLET & RICHARDSON
                                A LAW CORPORATION

                            10900 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
                                    SUITE 500
                          LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024
                            TELEPHONE (310) 208-1182
                               FAX (310) 208-1154


                                                              SEPTEMBER 19, 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WILLIAM T. JACOBSON
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ATLAS MINING COMPANY
630 EAST MULLAN AVENUE
OSBURN, IDAHO 83849

                  RE:      ATTORNEY-CLIENT FEE AGREEMENT
                           OUR FILE NO.:    1544-001

DEAR MR. JACOBSON,

THIS LETTER MEMORIALIZES OUR UNDERSTANDING REGARDING PAYMENT OF SHARES OF ATLAS
MINING COMPANY (THE "COMPANY"), BY WHICH WE AGREE TO ACCEPT 20,000 RESTRICTED
SHARES OF COMPANY COMMON STOCK, NO PAR VALUE (THE "SHARES"), ALONG WITH THE
RIGHT TO INCLUDE SUCH SHARES ON THE FIRST REGISTRATION STATEMENT FILED BY THE
COMPANY, IN EXCHANGE FOR DEFERRAL OF PAYMENT OF FEES FOR OUR LEGAL SERVICES.

WE HEREBY REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT WE ARE AN "ACCREDITED INVESTOR," AS THAT
TERM IS DEFINED IN THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE "ACT"), AND THAT
THE TRANSFER OF THE SHARES CONTEMPLATED HEREIN IS AND SHALL BE CONDUCTED AS AN
EXEMPT TRANSACTION UNDER SECTION 4(2) OF THE ACT AND RULE 506 OF REGULATION D OF
THE ACT. BOTH WE AND THE COMPANY HEREBY REPRESENT, WARRANT AND COVENANT THAT
SUCH TRANSFER HAS COMPLIED AND SHALL COMPLY IN BOTH SUBSTANCE AND FORM WITH ALL
REQUIREMENTS SUCH EXEMPTIONS TO REGISTRATION.

IF THE ARRANGEMENT DESCRIBED IN THIS LETTER IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU, PLEASE CONFIRM
YOUR AGREEMENT BY SIGNING THIS LETTER BELOW.
                                                 SINCERELY,

                                                 POLLET & RICHARDSON
                                                 A LAW CORPORATION


                                                 /S/ NIMISH PATEL
                                                 ---------------------------
                                                 NIMISH PATEL, ESQ., PARTNER

<PAGE>

THE UNDERSIGNED HAS READ AND UNDERSTANDS THE FOREGOING TERMS AND AGREES WITH
THEM AND ACCEPTS THEM.

                                          ATLAS MINING COMPANY
                                          AN IDAHO CORPORATION


SEPTEMBER 19, 2001                        /S/ WILLIAM T. JACOBSON
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          WILLIAM T. JACOBSON, PRESIDENT AND CEO
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6529 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to complete a land exchange 

with the Chugach Regional Alaska Native Corporation, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 13, 2016 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to complete a 

land exchange with the Chugach Regional Alaska Native 

Corporation, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Chugach Region Lands 

5 Study Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CHUGACH ALASKA CORPORATION LAND EXCHANGE 

7 POOL ACT. 

8 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act: 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 6529 IH

1 (1) CAC.—The term ‘‘CAC’’ means Chugach 

2 Alaska Corporation. 

3 (2) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State 

4 of Alaska. 

5 (3) CAC LANDS.—The term ‘‘CAC Lands’’ 

6 means lands conveyed to CAC pursuant to the Alas7 ka Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et 

8 seq.) in which— 

9 (A) both the surface estate and the sub10 surface estate were conveyed to CAC; or 

11 (B) the subsurface estate was conveyed to 

12 CAC and the surface estate or a conservation 

13 easement in the surface estate was acquired by 

14 the State or by the United States as part of the 

15 Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council Habitat 

16 Protection and Acquisition Program. 

17 (b) IDENTIFICATION OF FEDERAL LANDS.—Not 

18 later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 

19 Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the 

20 Secretary of Agriculture and in consultation with Chugach 

21 Alaska Corporation (CAC), shall identify not less than 

22 500,000 acres of economically viable Federal land in or 

23 outside the State of Alaska that can be made available 

24 to CAC in exchange for any CAC Lands identified by CAC 

25 as available to the United States for exchange. Any such 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

3 

•HR 6529 IH

1 exchange shall be pursuant to mutual agreement of CAC 

2 and the United States and consummated in accordance 

3 with all applicable legal authorizations, except that any 

4 acre-for-acre exchange of such Federal lands for such CAC 

5 Lands shall be conclusively deemed to be in the public in6 terest. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**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 Annual report of Tia IV, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB
      for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mary Passalaqua,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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.





/s/
                Mary PassalaquaMary
                PassalaquaTitle: 
                President, Secretary, and Sole DirectorDate: December
                20, 2007
# L_2004240DE.01001901.xml

| 10.7.2004 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 240/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.7.2004

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 240/19

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2370/2002 des Rates vom 20. Dezember 2002 zur Einführung einer Sofortmaßnahme der Gemeinschaft für das Abwracken von Fischereifahrzeugen

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 358 vom 31. Dezember 2002
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 358 vom 31. Dezember 2002

Seite 58, Artikel 6 Absatz 1:

anstatt:

„Antrag auf Zahlung des Zuschusses“

muss es heißen:

„Antrag auf Erstattung der Ausgaben“.

Seite 58, Artikel 7:

anstatt:

„für das Abwracken von Fischereifahrzeugen benötigten Mittel“

muss es heißen:

„für das Abwracken von Fischereifahrzeugen benötigten Finanzmittel“.

---
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# mtniteb**~tate5** 

# <!Courtof**~peaI5** 

# fortbejfeberaI(!Circuit

APPLE INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, 

### v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., AND 

### SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, Defendants-CrossAppellants. 2012-1600, -1606 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in case no. 11-CV-1846, Judge Lucy H. Koh. 

### ON MOTION Before SCHALL, Circuit Judge. 

### ORDER The First Amendment Coalition moves for leave to file a briefamicus curiae. Upon consideration thereof, IT Is ORDERED THAT: Case: 12-1600 Document: 53 Page: 1 Filed: 11/06/2012APPLE INC. V SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. The motion is granted. FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s19 2 Case: 12-1600 Document: 53 Page: 2 Filed: 11/06/2012
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-10187 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BOBBY ERVIN, a/k/a Luv, a/k/a Little Bobby, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:95-CR-252-X

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1996 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Bobby Ervin has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the brief, Ervin’s response to the brief, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. Ervin’s contention that counsel wasNo. 96-10187 - 2 - ineffective for failing to object to a two-level upward adjustment to his offense level is not sufficiently developed in the record before us; as to that contention only, Ervin’s appeal is DISMISSED without prejudice to Ervin’s ability to raise that contention in a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Higdon , 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir. 1987), cert. denied , 484 U.S. 1075 (1988).