alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.18.1



FIRST AMENDMENT TO



EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



The Employment Agreement (Agreement) between Mr. Paul M. Anderson (Mr. Anderson) and Duke Energy Corporation
(Duke Energy) dated November 1, 2003, is amended as follows:



1. The first sentence of Paragraph 6, Fringe Benefits, of the Agreement is amended to decrease Employees vacation entitlement from five weeks to four weeks. As amended, the first sentence of
paragraph 6 shall read:



6. Fringe Benefits.
Employee shall be entitled to four weeks of vacation annually, to be taken in accordance with Duke Energys policies, with no diminution in compensation.



2. Except as amended by this first amendment, the remaining provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain unchanged.



This the 9thday of March, 2004.



DUKE ENERGY CORPORATIONBy:

/s/    Leo E. Linbeck, Jr.Leo E. Linbeck, Jr.Title:

Chairman, Compensation Committee of the Board
of DirectorsEMPLOYEE/s/

(SEAL)




1 of 2



---

STATE OF CALIFORNIA



COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE



I, Katheryn C. Miller, a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that Leo E. Linbeck, Jr. personally came
before me this day and acknowledged that he is Chairman, Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors and acknowledged, on behalf of Duke Energy Corporation, the due execution of this Agreement.



Witness my hand and official seal, this 9thday of March, 2004



(Official Seal)

/s/Notary Public  My commission expires: 4/25/07










STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA



COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG



I, Sarah
T. Davis, a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that MR. PAUL M. ANDERSON personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of this Agreement.



Witness my hand and official seal, this 8thday of March, 2004.



(Official Seal)

/s/Notary Public  My commission expires: 10-10-04




2 of 2
# C_2014112EN.01003001.xml

| 14.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Mäurer & Wirtz v OHIM — Sacra (4711 Aqua Mirabilis)

(Case T-25/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark 4711 Aqua Mirabilis - Earlier Community word mark AQUA ADMIRABILIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Distinctive character of the earlier mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 112/39

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mäurer & Wirtz GmbH & Co. KG (Stolberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Schulte-Beckhausen and S. Hühner, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Pohlmann, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sacra Srl (Venice, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 November 2012 (Case R 1601/2011-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Sacra Srl and Mäurer & Wirtz GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mäurer & Wirtz GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mäurer & Wirtz GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 71, 9.3.2013.

1

---
# C_2015190EN.01001201.xml

| 8.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Matratzen Concord v OHIM — KBT (ARKTIS)

(Case T-258/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark ARKTIS - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Form of use of the mark - Proof use for the registered goods - Consent of the trade mark owner))

(2015/C 190/14)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Matratzen Concord GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: I. Selting and J. Mertens, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Schifko, agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: KBT & Co. Ernst Kruchen agenzia commerciale sociétá in accomandita (Locarno, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Schulze Horn, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 March 2013 (Case R 2133/2011-4) relating to revocation proceedings between Matratzen Concord GmbH and KBT & Co. Ernst Kruchen agenzia commerciale sociétá in accomandita.

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Matratzen Concord GmbH to pay the costs including the expenses necessarily incurred by KBT & Co. Ernst Kruchen agenzia commerciale sociétá in accomandita for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Matratzen Concord GmbH to pay the costs including the expenses necessarily incurred by KBT & Co. Ernst Kruchen agenzia commerciale sociétá in accomandita for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  
  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

---
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 Quarterly Report of Cedric Kushner Promotions,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I,  Cedric  Kushner,  President  and Chief  Executive  Officer  of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of
          the Company.


Dated:   November 21, 2005                  By: /s/ Cedric Kushner
                                               -------------------
                                               Cedric Kushner
                                               President and Chief Executive
                                               Officer

This  certification  accompanies  this Report on Form 10-QSB pursuant to Section
906 of the  Sarbane-Oxley  Act of 2002 and  shall  not,  except  to the  extent
required by such Act, be deemed  filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form with the  electronic  version  of this  written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust I and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding I, L.P. (the "Partnership")
for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kathleen Skero,
Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING I, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ KATHLEEN SKERO
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Kathleen Skero *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: March 29, 2005
_____________________

*  Kathleen Skero functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
No. 10-6422.

#### Ernest Miller, Petitioner v. California.

562 U.S. 1039, 131 S. Ct. 604,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8866.

178 L. Ed. 2d 430,

November 15, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma paup-*431eris denied, and petition for writ of certio-rari to the Supreme Court of California dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-01-1997
<CASH>                                       9,134,000
<SECURITIES>                                 8,780,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,388,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   921,000
<INVENTORY>                                 76,395,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           108,922,000
<PP&E>                                     271,776,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             153,303,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             254,748,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       97,192,000
<BONDS>                                    100,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       115,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,573,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               254,748,000
<SALES>                                  1,014,889,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,014,889,000
<CGS>                                      758,647,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              758,647,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               131,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          12,547,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,248,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,248,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,248,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .29
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 12.

                             MOBIL CORPORATION
             COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                               (In millions)

                                                                      Six
                                                                     Months
                                                                     Ended
                                   Year Ended December 31,          June 30,
                        __________________________________________  ________ 
                          1992     1993      1994    1995     1996      1997
                        ______   ______    ______  ______   ______    ______

Income Before Change in 
 Accounting Principle(s)$1,308   $2,084    $1,759  $2,376   $2,964    $1,676    
Add:
Income taxes.........    1,567    1,931     1,919   2,015    3,147     1,602    
Portion of rents
  representative of
  interest factor....      319      339       340     368      376       188   
Interest and debt
  discount expense ......  612      529(a)    461     467      455       189   
Earnings less (greater) 
  than dividends from  
  equity affiliates....     36      265       (40)    (51)     153      (126)  
                        ------   ------    ------  ------   ------    ------

Income as Adjusted ...  $3,842   $5,148    $4,439  $5,175   $7,095    $3,529   
                        ======   ======    ======  ======   ======    ======
Fixed Charges:
Interest and debt 
  discount expense ..    $ 612   $ 529(a)  $ 461   $  467   $  455    $  189   
Capitalized interest ...    42      42        37       47       78        49  
Portion of rents 
  representative of
  interest factor .......  319      339      340      368      376       188   
                        ------   ------   ------   ------   ------    ------
Total Fixed Charges ...  $ 973    $ 910    $ 838   $  882   $  909    $  426   
                        ======   ======   ======   ======   ======    ======
Ratio of Earnings to
  Fixed Charges ......     3.9      5.7(a)   5.3      5.9      7.8       8.3 
                        ======   ======   ======   ======   ======    ======


Note:

  For the years ended December 31, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996 and the six
months ended June 30, 1997, Fixed Charges exclude $37 million, $31 million, $37
million, $28 million, $24 million, and $15 million, respectively, of interest
expense attributable to debt issued by the Mobil Oil Corporation Employee Stock
Ownership Plan Trust and guaranteed by Mobil.


(a)  Excludes the favorable effect of $205 million of interest benefits from
     the resolution of prior-period tax issues.

MOBIL                              -20-
No. 09-11561.

#### Michael S. Lineker, Petitioner v. Alaska.

562 U.S. 888, 131 S. Ct. 221,

178 L. Ed. 2d 133,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6840.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Alaska denied.
July 1 5

, 2009

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Economic Feasibility of Testing Periodic Brick Kilns

FROM: Tom Walton

Economist

ABCG (C439

- 02)

TO: Jeff Telander
Engineer

MMG (D243

- 02)

This document addresses the po tential economic im pact of a requirement to test periodic
brick kilns. It uses available data provided by our EPA contractor on the cost of testing
and capacity utilization and data provided by the Brick Industry Association MACT
Task Force in a May 8 em ail.

Cost to sales is a goo d way to begin assessing impact . To do this a value of $117.20 per

ton from the industry email was combined with the costs and production estimates.
Because the costs vary with the stack configuration at the plant level and th e production
varies from kiln to kiln the costs to sales numbers vary widely. Annualized testing cost per kiln varies from $1,325 to $12,130. Production per kiln varies from 3 tons per year to

31,139 tons per year.

Number of

Kilns Annualized Testing Cos ts as a percentage of Sales

18 Less than 1%

26 Between 1% and 3%

5 Between 3% and 5%

46 Between 10% and 100%

2 Greater than 100%

While the estimates involve uncertainty about the sales, production, and capacity

utilization, the conclusion that the t esting is not economically feasible for most of the
kilns is quite clear. 53 of the 97 kilns have estimated cost to sales percentages of over

3%. Two of the kilns have estimates of over 700%.

While individual periodic kiln profit information is not av ailable the following illustrative
analysis is provided using profit numbers of 12% of sales as suggested as typical for a
good year in the May 6 email from the Brick Industry Association.Number

of Kilns Annualized Testing Costs
as a percentage of Profit

2 Less than 1%

16 Between 1% and10%

4 5 Between 10% and 50%

31 Between 50% and 100%

1 Between 100% and

1000%

2 Greater than 1000%
No. 09-8567.

#### Kelzin Squirewell, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1078, 131 S. Ct. 633,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9201.

178 L. Ed. 2d 509,

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 346 Fed. Appx. 959.
No. 10-7050.

#### Miguel Angel Ramirez-Rodriguez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1073, 131 S. Ct. 669,

178 L. Ed. 2d 498,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9273.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 10.22

                                                            February 1, 2006


Mr. Gary Granoff
Elk Associates Funding Corp.
747 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Dear Gary:

We are pleased to confirm that we hold available a line of credit for Elk
Associates Funding Corp. in the amount of $16,000,000.

Credit availability under this line is subject to the receipt of and continuing
satisfaction with current financial and other information which current
information is to be furnished by you to the Bank as we may, from time to time,
require.

The line of credit expires on April 30, 2006.

As in the past, the line of credit may be withdrawn at the Bank's sole
discretion at any time.

If you have any questions, please call me.

                                               Very truly yours,

                                               /s/ Robert J. Fainelli

                                               Robert J. Fainelli
                                               First Vice President


ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK MEMBER FDIC
511 FIFTH AVE. NEW YORK, NY 10017-4997 o TEL: (212) 551-8500
#### People v Maldonado

2d Dept: 144 AD3d 706 (Suffolk)

denied 3/29/17 (Garcia, J.)
EXHIBIT 31.1
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of VeridienCorporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the smallbusiness issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the smallbusiness issuer and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the smallbusiness issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and
c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal controls over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and
          b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 16, 2004   /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton Sheldon C. Fenton, Chief Executive Officer
28
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 32196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15660]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ID-3179-000]


Junona A. Jones; Notice of Filing

June 8, 1998.
    Take notice that on April 13, 1998, Junona A. Jones (Applicant) 
tendered for filing an application under section 305(b) of the Federal 
Power Act to hold the following positions:

Vice President--Pacific Gas & Electric Gas & Electric Supply
Governor--California Power Exchange Corporation

    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before June 19, 1998. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make Protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-15660 Filed 6-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 10-7047.

#### David C. Montoya, Petitioner v. Steve Hartley, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 1073, 131 S. Ct. 669,

178 L. Ed. 2d 498,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9123.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 389 Fed. Appx. 817.