alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.2






EXHIBIT 10.2




NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT




This Non-Competition Agreement (“Agreement”) is made as of March 3, 2008 by and between
ValueVision Media, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (together with its subsidiaries, the “Company”),
and Rene Aiu (the “Employee”) pursuant to and in consideration of the offer of employment dated
March 3, 2008.



Non-Compete. While Employee is working for the Company and, if Employee voluntarily resigns
or departs from the Company under circumstances where Employee receives severance payments from the
Company, then also for the Non-competition Period (defined below) following his/her departure,
Employee will not:



(i) directly or indirectly own, manage, control, participate in, be a director, officer or employee
of, lend Employee’s name to, act as consultant or advisor to, render services to, or receive
compensation from, any other person or entity engaged or seeking to engage in the television home
shopping business (including a television home shopping channel internet site) anywhere within the
United States;



(ii) induce or attempt to induce any employee of the Company to leave his or her employment with
the Company, or in any other way interfere with the relationship between the Company and any other
employee of the Company; or



(iii) induce or attempt to induce any customer, vendor, franchisee, licensee, or other business
relation of the Company to cease doing business with the Company, or in any way interfere with the
relationship between such party and the Company.



For purposes of this Agreement, “Non-competition Period” shall mean the period commencing as of the
date of this Agreement and ending on the last day of the twelfth (12th) month following
the last day of the month in which Employee’s employment with the Company ends.



Entire Agreement; Governing Law. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the
parties relating to Employee’s non-compete agreement with the Company and supersedes all prior
agreements and understandings with respect to such subject matter. All matters relating to the
interpretation, application, validity and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by the
laws of the State of Minnesota, without regard to that state’s conflict of laws provisions.



	 	 	 	 	 
	VALUEVISION MEDIA, INC.	 	EMPLOYEE
	/s/ Nathan E. Fagre
	 	/s/ Rene G. Aiu
	 
	 	 
	Name:

	 	Nathan E. Fagre
	 	Name: Rene G. Aiu
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 104 (Friday, May 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 31096]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12681]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE:  10:00 a.m., Friday, June 27, 2014.

PLACE: 1155 21st St. NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS:  Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance, Enforcement Matters, and 
Examinations. In the event that the times, dates, or locations of this 
or any future meetings change, an announcement of the change, along 
with the new time and place of the meeting will be posted on the 
Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, 202-
418-5964.

Natise Allen,
 Executive Assistant.
[FR Doc. 2014-12681 Filed 5-28-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
----

| Date:  | March                14, 2007 |   |                                                    |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                          | By:    | /s/                David L. Johnson                     |
|   |                          |   | David                L. Johnson                         |
|   |                          |   | Chairman                of the Board,                   |
|   |                          |   | President                and Chief Executive Officer of |
|   |                          |   | Maxus                Realty Trust, Inc.                 |
Exhibit 99-a

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Newhall Land and Farming Company for the quarter ended June 30,
2002, I, Gary M. Cusumano, President and Chief Executive Officer of Newhall Management Corporation (Principal Executive Officer), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:



|Dated: August 12, 2002 |  | THE NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING COMPANY
(a California Limited Partnership)
Registrant
|---------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  |                                                                                   
|                       |  | By Newhall Management Limited Partnership,
Managing General Partner               
|                       |  |                                                                                   
|                       |  | By Newhall Management Corporation,
Managing General Partner                       
|                       |  |                                                                                   
|                       |  | By:                                                                               
|                       |  |                                                                                   

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
<LEGEND>
     (This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from (A)
Interim  Consolidated  Balance  Sheets,  Statements  of  Operations,  Change  in
Stockholders Equity and Cash Flows and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such (B)  quarterly  report on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended  September
30, 1996)
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
       
<S>                                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                  SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                                850
<SECURITIES>                                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                   49,532
<PP&E>                                                             17,378
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      7,491
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                    164,423
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             783,608
<BONDS>                                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                                           0
<COMMON>                                                          130,052    
<OTHER-SE>                                                       (749,237)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                      164,423
<SALES>                                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      0
<CGS>                                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  800,119
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  8,633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  (808,752)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              (808,752)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     (808,752)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         0
                                                              

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,211
<SECURITIES>                                     7,025
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,064
<ALLOWANCES>                                       671
<INVENTORY>                                     10,597
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                35,921
<PP&E>                                           7,969
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,588
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,765
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,251
<BONDS>                                            147
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        43,075
<OTHER-SE>                                    (13,708)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    39,765
<SALES>                                         14,114
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,114
<CGS>                                            8,184
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,184
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,555
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    17
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  56
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,483
<INCOME-TAX>                                       163
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,320
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,320
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

DEBORAH JOY DURAND, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30244

D.C. No. 

4:16-cr-00043-BMM-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 5, 2018** 

Portland, Oregon

Before: FERNANDEZ and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and SESSIONS,*** District

Judge.

 

FILED

NOV 23 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable William K. Sessions III, United States District Judge

for the District of Vermont, sitting by designation.
Deborah Joy Durand appeals her convictions following a bench trial for

fraudulent acts in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1920, 1343, 287, and 641.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a finder

of fact could reasonably determine that Durand’s statements to Dr. James Hood

regarding the extent of her impairments and pain were false. Because Dr. Hood’s

diagnosis of Durand as permanently disabled was based on her false statements,

and the government relied on Dr. Hood’s flawed diagnosis in classifying Durand as

permanently disabled, Durand was not entitled to rely on either the diagnosis or the

government’s classification. For the same reason, neither the diagnosis nor the

government’s classification constituted entrapment by estoppel which prevented

Durand from returning to work. See United States v. Batterjee, 361 F.3d 1210,

1216 (9th Cir. 2004). Because Durand had certified that she would immediately

inform the government of any improvement in her medical condition, she was not

entitled to continue collecting benefits until the government asked her for followup information or offered her appropriate employment. Although Durand and her

witnesses testified that she was in fact permanently disabled, the factfinder was

free to credit the contrary evidence. See United States v. Nevils, 598 F.3d 1158,

1164–65 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc). 

2
A reasonable factfinder could also conclude that Durand was guilty of fraud

for filing 31 claims for medically-related travel reimbursement to locations that

had no corresponding records of medical appointments or prescription-pickups by

Durand. Although Durand testified that the claims she filed were legitimate

despite the lack of corresponding records, the factfinder was free to not believe her. 

United States v. Williams, 435 F.2d 642, 645–46 (9th Cir. 1970). Accordingly, the

evidence introduced at trial was sufficient for a rational finder of fact to find the

essential elements of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. See Nevils, 598 F.3d

at 1163–65; United States v. Spears, 631 F.2d 114, 117 (9th Cir. 1980). 

AFFIRMED. 

3
Exhibit 99.6

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the annual report of
Exeter Resource Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Wendell Zerb, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.



|April 1, 2013 | /s/ Wendell Zerb             
|------------- | -----------------------------
|              |                              
|              | Wendell Zerb                 
|              | Chief Executive Officer      
|              | (Principal Executive Officer)
Order entered October 30 , 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 19
- 01160
- CR PEDRO SANTIAGO MARIN, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Cri m ina l District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F 19
- 52413
- Y

O RDER
A ppellant ’s brief was initially due on January 26, 2020. Although w e
gra n t ed a motion extending the t ime until March 2, 202 0 , no brief was filed. On May 18, 2020, w e abate d the appeal for a hearing

. Eight days later, appellate

c ounsel Valencia Bush filed a letter informing us that the signe d jury charge on guilt/innocence was missing from the clerk ’ s record. In the interest of expediting the appeal, we reinstated the a ppeal , vacated our order to the extent it required a hearing, ordered the district clerk to file a supplementa l cler k ’ s record with t hesigned jury charge by June 9, 2020 , and ordere d ap pe llant ’ s brief due thirty days

after the supplemental clerk ’ s record was f iled. On July 8, 2020, the supplemental clerk ’ s record was filed , making appellant ’ s brief due on August 7, 2020. Two weeks later, Ms. Bush filed a nother motion for an extension of time to file the brief which we granted . We or dered the brief due by September 2 5, 2020 a nd cautioned Ms. Bush that further extensions were disfavored. T o date, th e brief has not been filed , and we have had no further communication from Ms. Bush

. W e ORDER Valencia Bush removed as appellant’s appointed attorney of record.
We ORDER the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal and to transmit a supplemental record containing the order appointing new counsel to this Court within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send c opies of th is order, by electronic transmission, to the Honorable Chika Anyiam, Presiding Judge, Criminal District C o urt No. 7 ; to Felic ia Pitre, Dallas County District Clerk; to Valencia Bush ; and

to the Dallas County District At torney ’ s Office, Appellate Division.
W e ABATE the appeal to allow t he trial court to comply with this order. The appeal will be reinstated fifteen days from the date of this order or when the order appointing new counsel is received. /s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Exar Corporation on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 27, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
that the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Exar Corporation.

Date: February 5, 2010



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/S/    PEDRO (PETE) P.
RODRIGUEZ               
|Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez                      
|Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|(Principal Executive Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18225-18226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9085]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-23-000]


Overland Trail Transmission, LLC; Notice of Petition for Rate 
Approval

April 14, 2009.
    Take notice that on March 31, 2009, Overland Trail Transmission, 
LLC (OTTCO) filed a petition for rate approval for NGPA section 311 
maximum transportation rate for firm and interruptible transportation 
service, pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2) of the Commission's 
regulations. OTTCO proposes to change its currently effective maximum 
system-wide rate for firm and interruptible transportation to $0.5151 
per MMBTU, plus a pro rata charge for fuel and lost-and-unaccounted-for 
gas.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must 
file a motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). 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 notice of intervention or 
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests 
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing 
an intervention or protest must serve a

[[Page 18226]]

copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention 
or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve 
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#13555641505c7d7f7a7d76406663637c616753757661703d747c65"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="33757661707c5d5f5a5d56604643435c414773555641501d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 24, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-9085 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EMILIA YANIRA MENDOZA

GALDAMEZ, Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 18

- 72428 Agency No. A209

- 231

- 490

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 19, 2019 * *
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Emilia Yanira Mendoza

- Galdamez , a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. Our juri sdiction is governed

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

AUG 26 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 72428 by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey , 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and regulations, Simeono v v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The agency did not err in finding that Mendoza

- Galdamez failed to establish membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch , 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M

- E

- V

- G

- , 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))). Mendoza

- Galdamez does not articulate any challenge to the agency’s finding in her opening brief . Thus, Mendoza

Galdamez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
The BIA did not err in declining to consider Mendoza

- Galdamez’s arguments regarding family as a social group that were raised for the first time to
the BIA. See Honcharov v. Barr , 924 F.3d 1293, 1297 (9th Cir. 2019)

. We lack jurisdiction to review Mendoza

- Galdamez’s contention that the IJ violated her due process rights because she failed to raise it below. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674, 677

- 78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review3 18

- 72428 claims not presented to the agency)

. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.