alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ptx_ex1023.htm


EXHIBIT 10.23


 



AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE


PERNIX THERAPEUTICS HOLDINGS, INC.


2009 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN


 


WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Pernix Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)  may, subject to certain exceptions, amend the Company’s 2009 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) without the approval of stockholders.


 


WHEREAS, the Board deems it desirable and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to increase the maximum number of shares that may be granted under the Plan to any one individual during any one year fiscal period from 1,100,000 shares to 1,500,000 shares (the “Proposed Amendment”).


 


WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the Proposed Amendment to the Plan is not material.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 



	
1.  

	
Section 5.3(b) of the Plan shall be deleted in its entirety and shall be replaced with the following:







 


“(b)  The maximum number of shares of Common Stock that may be covered by Incentives granted under the Plan to any one individual during any one fiscal-year period shall be 1,500,000.”


 


Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, all other terms and conditions set forth in the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan.


 


This Amendment has been adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company as of February 4, 2014.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appellate case name: Ankus, L.L.C. v. U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee

Appellate case number: 01-18-00777-CV

Trial court case number: 2017-48651

Trial court: 281st District Court of Harris County

Date motion filed: August 19, 2020

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is denied.

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Julie Countiss_______

Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Justices Keyes, Goodman, and Countiss.

Date: December 17, 2020
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.6

                              Consent of Appraiser

     We hereby consent to the references made to us and/or our appraisal by
Hanover Equipment Trust 2001A, Hanover Compressor Company and Hanover
Compression Limited Partnership under the headings "Prospectus Summary--The
Operating Lease Transaction," "Risk Factors," and "The Equipment" in the
Prospectus constituting a part of this Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement
on Form S-4.

                                             AMERICAN APPRAISAL ASSOCIATES, INC.

                                             By:     /s/ Dale J. Egan
                                                --------------------------------
                                             Name:  Dale J. Egan
                                             Title: General Counsel

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

November 22, 2002
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.5

                       Consent of Independent Accountants

     We hereby consent to the use in this Amendment No. 4 to Registration
Statement on Form S-4 of our reports dated May 2, 2002, except as to Notes 20
and 21 to the consolidated financial statements, which are as of November 18,
2002, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule of Hanover Compression Limited Partnership, which appear in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in such Registration Statement.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
January 10, 2003
| (logo) WELLS

       FARGO | **Corporate****Trust Services**

 

MAC R1204-010 

9062 Old Annapolis Road 

Columbia, MD 21045 

 

Tel:  410 884 2000 

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.

1585 Broadway

New York, New York 10036

 

 

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill

Lynch Trust 2014-C19, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series

2014-C19

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of December 1, 2014 ( the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 

 

March 9, 2015

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

Brian Smith

Vice President

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 23-0154 

AGNES ADVENTURES, LLC, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JORDI ANZIK, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

FILED 

MAR 1 4 2023 

Bowen Greenwoory 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

StatR of h/lontana 

ORDER 

Appellant Jordi Anzik has filed a notice of appeal from the February 9, 2023 Order on 

Appeal from Justice Court of the First Judicial District Court, Cause No. ADV-2022-1071, 

that the District Court has certified as final pursuant to M. R. Civ. P. 54(b). 

Pursuant to M. R. App. P. 4(4)(b), we have reviewed the District Court's certification 

order for compliance with M. R. App. P. 6(6). We conclude the court's certification order is 

in substantial compliance with the requirements of Rule 6(6) and our case law interpreting 

certification orders under Rule 54(b). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this appeal may proceed. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record. 

DATED this 1"--t ay of March, 2023. 

Chief Justice 

• 

03/14/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0154
94( A l togAIL 

Justices 

2
1 The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Missouri.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-3339

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Charles C. Gibson, Jr., also know as * Eastern District of Missouri. Chuck Gibson, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 3, 2000 Filed: March 10, 2000

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Charles C. Gibson, Jr. appeals from the final judgment of the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846; two counts of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); one count of conspiring to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) and (h); and four counts of money laundering, in-2-

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) and 2. Gibson also consented to two counts of property forfeiture. The district court sentenced him to concurrent terms of 360 months imprisonment on his conspiracy and possession-with-intent-to-distribute counts, and 240 months on his money laundering counts, to be followed by five years supervised release. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing for reversal that the district court violated Gibson’s due process ri ghts by “failing to conduct an adequate factual finding” on whether Gibson’s extraordinary physical impairment warranted a downward departure under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5H1.4 (1997).

We reject counsel’s argument that the district court violated Gibson’s due pro cess rights. See UnitedStates v. Granados , No. 98-2488, 2000 WL 98630 at *2 (8th Cir. Jan. 31, 2000) (district court has discretion to determine appropriate procedure in conducting sentencing hearing, including whether to receive additional evidence); United States v. Carr , 66 F.3d 981, 983 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (due process violation is established only if defendant shows district court relied on materially false informationas basis for challenged sentence). To the extent the due process argument is actually an attack on the district court’s discretionary refusal to depart, such a challenge is unreviewable. See UnitedStates v. Eagle , 133 F.3d 608, 611 (8th Cir. 1998) (district

court’s discretionary refusal to depart downward under § 5H1.4 is not reviewable).

After review of counsel’s Anders brief, along with our independent review of the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.-3-

A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
| (logo) WELLS           FARGO | Corporate Trust Services

 

MAC R1204-010 9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel:  410 884 2000

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation

60 Wall Street

New York, New York 10005

 

 

 

 

RE:   Annual Statement of Compliance for COMM 2014-CCRE21 Mortgage Trust

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of December 1, 2014 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 

 

February 24, 2015

 

 

 
| /s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President | /s/ Dave Ward

Dave Ward

Senior Vice President |
|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Guy Eric WALDRON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30072

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 19, 2018

Tom Bartleson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USHE — Office of the US Attorney, Helena, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee

John Rhodes, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FDMT — Federal Defenders of Montana (Missoula), Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Guy Eric Waldron appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Waldron contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court improperly assessed Wal-dron’s risk to the public. We review for abuse of discretion. *See Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Although the 24-month sentence represents an upward variance from the Guidelines range, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion. This sentence is substantively reasonable in light of Waldron’s criminal history and breach of trust, including his repeated supervised release violations. *See*18 U.S.C § 3583(e); *United States v. Miqbel,*444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006) (at a revocation sentencing, the district court may sanction the defendant for breaching the court’s trust by failing to abide by the conditions of supervision).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
| (logo) Prudential | Prudential Asset Resources

 

Prudential Mortgage Capital Company

2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500, Dallas TX 75201

Tel 214 777-4500

 

A business of Prudential Financial, Inc. |
|-------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

Attn: Commercial Mtg Servicing

MAC D1086-120

550 South Tryon Street, 14th Floor

Charlotte, NC 28202

 

 

 

RE:        Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-LC18, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through, **Series 2014-LC18**

Period:  **December 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 (the “Reporting Period”)**

**Annual Compliance****Statement**

I, Hal Collett, in my capacity as President and Managing Director of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certify with regard to the Company's role as Primary Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, (the "Agreement") dated as of December 1, 2014 pertaining to the above-referenced certificates, that:

 

(i)    a review of the activities of the Company under the Agreement during the period noted above, and of the performance of the Company under the Agreement during the reporting period has been made under my supervision, and

 

 

(ii)    to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout the reporting period.

 

 

 

 

Effective as of March 16, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Hal Collett

Hal Collett

President and Managing Director

Prudential Asset Resources, Inc.
Exhibit
4.2


 




	
  

  	
  THIS CERTIFIES
  THAT IS THE OWNER OF SECRETARY FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE
  COMMON STOCK, $.001 PAR VALUE PER SHARE, OF COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED:
  AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST COMPANY, LLC (Brooklyn, NY) TRANSFER
  AGENT AND REGISTRAR By: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 2U, INC. Dated: SEE REVERSE FOR
  CERTAIN DEFINITIONS CUSIP 90214J 10 1 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
  STATE OF DELAWARE transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder
  hereof in person or by duly authorized Attorney, upon surrender of this
  Certificate, properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until
  countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. WITNESS the
  facsimile signatures of the Corporation’s duly authorized officers. C OMMO N
  S TO C K PRESIDENT 2U, INC. 

  






 


 












	
  

  	
  UNIF GIFT MIN
  ACT– Custodian (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (State) The
  following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
  certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full
  according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM TEN ENT JT TEN as
  tenants in common as tenants by the entireties as joint tenants with right of
  survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also
  be used though not in the above list. – – – of the common stock represented
  by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
  to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with
  full power of substitution in the premises. Dated For value received, hereby
  sell, assign and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
  IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE Shares Attorney PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME
  AND ADDRESS INCLUDING ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE SIGNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: THE
  SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS,
  STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP
  IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C.
  RULE 17Ad-15. THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME
  AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT
  ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATSOEVER. NOTICE: Shares Attorney
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mario Alejandro SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-40465 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 20, 2018

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Mario Alejandro Sanchez, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and HO, Circuit Judges.

*294PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario Alejandro Sanchez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (6th Cir. 2011). Sanchez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant parts of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cíe. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

The undersigned executive officer of First Federal Bancshares ofArkansas, Inc. (the “Registrant”) hereby certifies that the Registrant’s Form10-Q for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2004 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13a or 15d of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theRegistrant.

 

 
|                 | /s/Sherri R. Billings       |   |
|----------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                 | Sherri R. Billings          |
|                 | EVP/Chief Financial Officer |
|                 |                        |
| Date: August 5, 2004 |                        |

 

----
#### Erick Oswaldo Alvarez ARIAS, Erick O. Alvarez, AKA Erick Oswaldo Alvarez, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-73038

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 20, 2017

Larry Liem, Doan, Attorney, Law Offices of Larry L. Doan, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner

Andrew Jacob Oliveira, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument, *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Erick Oswaldo Alvarez Arias, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal, asylum, and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo whether an offense qualifies as an aggravated felony. *Carlos-Blaza v. Holder,*611 F.3d 583, 587 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Alvarez Arias’ conviction for possession of marijuana for sale under California Health and Safety Code § 11359 is categorically an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C; § 1101(a)(43)(B). *See Roman-Suaste v. Holder,*766 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2014) (holding conviction under statute to be a categorical aggravated felony after considering *Moncrieffe v. Holder,*569 US 184, 133 S.Ct. 1678, 185 L.Ed.2d 727 (2013)). Accordingly, the agency did not err in finding him ineligible for cancellation of removal and asylum. *See 8*U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii), (b)(2)(B)(i); 1229b(a).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 32

Certification of Chief Executive Officer  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Alliance
Imaging, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:



|                       |  |                                                                        
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 13, 2003 |  |                                                                        
|                       |  |                                                                        
|                       |  | /s/PAUL S. VIVIANOPaul S. Viviano President and
Chief Executive Officer

---

Certification of Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Alliance
Imaging, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:



|                       |  |                                                                                     
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 13, 2003 |  |                                                                                     
|                       |  |                                                                                     
|                       |  | /s/KENNETH S. ORDKenneth S. Ord Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer

---

QuickLinks
#### Carlos David DOMINGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee

No. 17-50057 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed January 4, 2018

*842Carlos David Dominguez, Pro Se

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellee

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Carlos David Dominguez appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of error *comm*nobis. Dominguez has completed his 110-month term of imprisonment but is still serving a 10-year term of supervised release.

At all times, this court must be assured of its jurisdiction and the district court’s jurisdiction. *United States v. Key,*205 F.3d 773, 774 (5th Cir. 2000), Because Dominguez is subject to an unexpired term of supervised release, he is “in custody” and ineligible for *coram nobis*relief. *See United States v. Hatten,*167 F.3d 884, 887 n.6 (5th Cir. 1999), We therefore affirm on the alternative ground that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Dominguez’s petition. *See United States*v. *Early,*27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.