alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 95-31082

Summary Calendar

_____________________

FRANKLIN D. FRAZIER, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CALVIN JOHNSON,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-2283-J

_________________________________________________________________

February 14, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This is an appeal from the dismissal of the appellant's civil

rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). We

have reviewed the record, the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation, and the district court's order, and find no

reversible error. Because the appeal is frivolous, it is

DISMISSED. 5th Cir. Rule 42.2; Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
-2-

218-19 (5th Cir. 1983). Frazier's motions for certificate of

probable cause and for stay of execution are DENIED.

We caution Frazier that any additional frivolous appeals filed

by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions.

To avoid sanctions, Frazier is further cautioned to review any

pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING GIVEN.
# C_2004208EN.01000901.xml

| 18.8.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 208/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case No COMP/M.3524 — BARCLAYS PRIVATE EQUITY FRANCE/FIVES-LILLE)

(2004/C 208/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 10 August 2004, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 304M3524. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. For more information on how to access Celex, see ‘subscriber information’ links below: |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 304M3524. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. For more information on how to access Celex, see ‘subscriber information’ links below:

CELEX: subscriber information

http://publications.eu.int/general/en/eulaw_en.htm

---
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

Diversified Maintenance Systems, Inc. ) ASBCA No. 63578

)

Under Contract No. FA4855-18-D-0002 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Timothy Miguel Willardson, Esq.

 Counsel

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Caryl A. Potter III, Esq.

 Air Force Deputy Chief Trial Attorney

Lawrence M. Anderson, Esq.

 Trial Attorney

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The appeal has been withdrawn. Accordingly, it is dismissed from the Board’s 

docket with prejudice.

Dated: August 24, 2023

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63578, Appeal of Diversified 

Maintenance Systems, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: August 24, 2023

JAMES SWEET

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
ex10_9.htm


 


 


Please reference, Exhibit 10.9 - Amendment No. 1 to the Stockholders' Agreement, which is attached as a .pdf file.
Case 19-15024-RAM Doc 35 Filed 08/22/19 Page 1 of 1
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, Vincent C. Smith, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Quest Software, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Quest Software, Inc.



|                     |  |        |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: April 29, 2004 |  | By:    |  | /s/    VINCENT C.
SMITH
|                     |  | Name:  |  | Vincent C. Smith       
|                     |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.24

     CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND
     EXCHANGE COMMISSION. THE LOCATIONS OF THE OMITTED MATERIALS ARE INDICATED
     BY THE FOLLOWING NOTATION: [***].

                                    Agreement

     Sanken Electric Co., Ltd. ("Sanken") and Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.
     ("Allegro") agreed as follows concerning the certain terms of the Licensing
     Agreement for "Allegro Trademark" dated on December 28, 2006.

                                   WITNESSETH

1. Sanken and Allegro shall share the consideration for this agreement in
Article 3 ([***]) by splitting fifty-fifty.

2. Allegro shall reimburse to Sanken the Allegro's portion of the consideration
in the preceding paragraph ([***]), of which Sanken shall pay to
Sharp on behalf of Allegro, in the way to be discussed and agreed with Sanken.

In witness whereof, this Agreement has been prepared by Sanken and Allegro, the
both party shall each retain one part.

December 28, 2006

     Sanken    3-6-3, Kitano, Niza-shi, Saitama
               Sanken Electric Co., Ltd.


               /s/ Hirohito Sekine
               --------------------------------------------
               Hirohito Sekine
               Director and Executive Vice President

     Allegro   115 Northeast Cutoff, Worcester,
               Massachusetts 01606
               Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.


               /s/ Fred Windover
               --------------------------------------------
               Vice President and General Counsel
               Fred Windover
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          20,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,000
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,767
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           200
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,087
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 338 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 338

 To prohibit royalty incentives for deepwater drilling, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2011

 Mrs. Feinstein (for herself and Mr. Nelson of Florida) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit royalty incentives for deepwater drilling, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Deepwater Drilling Royalty Relief 
Prohibition Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ROYALTY INCENTIVES FOR DEEPWATER DRILLING.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
Secretary of the Interior shall not issue any oil or gas lease sale 
under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) 
with royalty-based incentives in any tract located in water depths of 
400 meters or more on the outer Continental Shelf.
    (b) Royalty Relief for Deep Water Production.--Section 345 of the 
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15905) is repealed.
    (c) Royalty Relief.--Section 8(a)(3) of the Outer Continental Shelf 
Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
                    ``(D) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding subparagraphs 
                (A) through (C) or any other provision of law, the 
                Secretary shall not reduce or eliminate any royalty or 
                net profit share for any lease or unit located in water 
                depths of 400 meters or more on the outer Continental 
                Shelf.''.
    (d) Application.--This section and the amendments made by this 
section--
            (1) apply beginning with the first lease sale held on or 
        after the date of enactment of this Act for which a final 
        notice of sale has not been published as of that date; and
            (2) do not apply to a lease in effect on the date of 
        enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU LY 31, 2017

NO. 03

- 15

- 00786

- CR

The State of Texas, Appellant

v.

Christopher Reid Dewbre, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 6 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUST ICE ROSE, JUSTICES P EMBERTON AND BOURLAN D
REVERSED AND REMANDED

— OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the orde r signed by the trial court on December 2, 2015

. Having reviewed

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible error in the trial

court’s order . Therefore, the Court reverses the trial court’s order and remands the case for

further proceedings consistent with this opinion

. Because appellee is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
## Court of Appeals of the State of Geo rgia

ATLA NTA,

_________________ _ The Court of

Appeals he reby passes

the followi

ng order: A14A1406. HARRIS v. THE ST ATE. In this appea l from

the superi or court’ s denial of a pretri al mot

ion to dismiss on the basis of

immunity under OCGA § 16-3-21 and 16-3-24.2 , we granted Ha rris’ applicati on for discretionary review based upon the

limit ed facts stated the rein. In an excess of caution

given the information av ailable, we granted the application in order to review the partie s’ contentions with the benef it of the e ntire re cord. A careful and complet e review of the enti

re recor d, the transcripts, and the briefs of the par

ties reve als that the super ior court c orrectly concluded t

hat the evidence did not support a finding of immunity. H ad the facts appar ent from th e entire record be en availa

ble in the a

pplication, discretio nary r eview w ould not have been granted. Theref

ore, upon c onsiderati on of the entire recor d, applicab le case law, and statutory provisions, these discretionaryappeals a re hereb y dism

issed as ha

ving been improvidently granted. See Woody v . State , 247 Ga. App. 684, 685 (545 SE2d 83) (2001).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Offi

ce, Atlant a,_______________

___ I certify t hat the abo ve is a tr ue extract f rom the minutes of the Court

of Appeals

of Georgia. Witness my signat

ure and the seal

of said co urt hereto aff

ixed the day and year last above writt

en. , Clerk. 08/26/2014 August 26, 2014
Form of Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.1 

	
	 






  
 NUMBER 
 EG 

SHARES 
 eGamesTM, Inc. 
 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS 

NASDAQ: EGAM COMMON STOCK CUSIP 282253 10 3 
 THIS CERTIFIES THAT: 
 is owner of 

FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF NO PAR VALUE EACH OF 

eGames, Inc. 
 transferable on the books of the Corporation in person or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate duly endorsed or assigned. This certificate and the shares represented hereby are
subject to the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and to the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Corporation, as now or hereafter amended. This certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent. 

WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. 

DATED: 
 COUNTERSIGNED: 
 STOCKTRANS, INC. 

7 EAST LANCASTER AVE., ARDMORE, PA 19003 
 TRANSFER AGENT 
 BY: 

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 
 EGAMES, INC. 
 CORPORATE 

SEAL 
 1992 
 PENNSYLVANIA 

CONTROLLER 
 PRESIDENT 
 © 1990 COLUMBIA FINANCIAL PRINTING
CO., HICKSVILLE, NY 11801 







 



 
  
 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 - as tenants in common 
 TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties 
 JT TEN -
as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common 
 UNIF GIFT MIN ACT - Custodian

 (Cust) (Minor) 
 under Uniform Gifts to Minors 
 Act 

(State) 
 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 
 For Value Received, 
 hereby sell, assign and
transfer unto 
 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 

(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) 

Shares of the stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney

 to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the
premises. 
 Dated 
 NOTICE: 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. 
 THE SIGNATURE TO THE ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND TO THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THIS
CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATSOEVER, AND MUST BE GUARANTEED BY A COMMERCIAL BANK OR TRUST COMPANY OR A MEMBER FIRM OF A NATIONAL OR REGIONAL OR OTHER RECOGNIZED STOCK EXCHANGE IN CONFORMANCE
WITH A SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM. 
 STOCK MARKET INFORMATION EXCHANGE 

www.stockinformation.com 
 COLUMBIA FINANCIAL PRINTING CO., P.O. BOX 219, BETHPAGE, NY 11714
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1190 Prepped by Candice Davis



### Document

Number: 

# 12 ) IV-B-1 2 Docket Number: 

# A-90-2 8

Printed 5/5/2008 9:13:50 AM

Sheet 12 of 106P. 2

March 27 , 199 6 Summar y o f Meeting Betwee

n For d Motor C o an d EP A Participants : For

d - Joh n Trajnowski , To

mFalahee , Jeanett

e Clute , Paul Baltusis ; EP

A - David Dickinson , Tod

d Sherwood , Cliffor

d Tyree Meeting wa s requeste d b

y For d t o presen

t informatio n a s t o wh y i t feel s i t cannot full y coippl y wit h California' s OB D I I requirements . For d presente d bot

h genera l o r "public " information an

d als o informatio

n i t ha d previousl

y show n t o CAR B an d whic h For d wante d EP

A t o trea t a s confidential . EP

A informe d For d tha t al l informatio

n would b e considere d but

tha t EP A could onl

y rel y upo n informatio

n actuall y i n th e docke

t withi n it s waive r decision . For d explaine d it s abilit y t o eithe r fulfil l o r potentiall y not fulfil l th e variou s misfir

e even t monitoring requirement s dependin g upon th e numbe

r of cylinders bein

g monitored an

d wha t rang e of RP M monitoring i s required . For d state d tha

t specifi c engin e mode l capabilit y wa s confidentia l but tha t i t wa s worrie d abou

t mode l availabilit y and/o r deficiencies . For

d di d no t provid e an y specifi c cos t figures bu t sai d i t would b e ver

y expensive an

d state d tha

t CAR B wa s prone t o compar

e on e manufacturer' s abilit

y t o anothe

r manufacture

r t o determin

e wha t i s achievable . For d als o state d tha

t CAR B ha s not give n enoug h lea d tim e fo r th e LE V catalys t monitoring requirement s becaus e ofth e necessit y of bot h learnin g wher e t o plac e monitor s an

d then packaging . For

d state d tha

t becaus e of

vehicl e t o vehicle variabilit

y mor e lea d tim e wa s needed an d therefor e phase-i n shoul d b e delaye

d an d lessened . For d als o expressed concer

n abou t combustibilit

y problem s wit

h mode l yea r 200 0 eva p lea k detectio n an

d suggeste d tha

t mor e tha n on e deficienc y shoul d b e allowed .
Exhibit 10.15


 


Phase Forward Incorporated


 


Summary of Cash and Equity Compensation Practices for Non-Employee
Directors

(Effective January 1, 2008)


 


Cash
Compensation


 




	
  Annual retainer for Board
  membership(1)

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  30,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Audit and Finance
  Committee(2)

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Annual retainer for committee membership

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  12,000

  	
   

  
	
  Additional retainer for committee chair

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  8,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Management Development and
  Compensation Committee(3)

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Annual retainer for committee membership

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  7,000

  	
   

  
	
  Additional retainer for committee chair

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  8,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Governance, Nominating and
  Compliance Committee(3)

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Annual retainer for committee membership

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  7,000

  	
   

  
	
  Additional retainer for committee chair

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  4,000

  	
   

  






 






 


(1)             Annual
Retainer for Board service covers four regular Board meetings and one special
Board budget meeting.


 


(2)             Annual
Retainers for Audit and Finance Committee service cover six regular meetings of
the committee.


 


(3)             Annual
Retainers for Management Development and Compensation Committee service and
Governance, Nominating and Compliance Committee service cover four regular
meetings of each committee.


 


For additional meetings not included in
the annual retainers listed above: 


 




	
  Board Meeting Fees (per meeting)

  	
   

  	
  $1,000/in person;
  $500/telephone

  	
   

  
	
  Committee Meeting Fees (per meeting)

  	
   

  	
  $1,000/in person;
  $500/telephone

  	
   

  






 


 


Equity Compensation


 


Upon the initial election
to the Board of Directors, each non-employee member receives a one-time grant
of $150,000 worth of restricted stock units under the Phase Forward
Incorporated 2004 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “2004 Plan”).


 


All non-employee Board
members are eligible to receive an annual grant of $75,000 worth of restricted
stock units under the 2004 Plan.


 


All restricted stock unit
awards granted to non-employee Board members vests as follows: 50% on second
anniversary of the grant and an additional 25% on each of the third and fourth
anniversary of the date of grant. In the event of a change in control of the
Registrant, all restricted stock unit awards granted to a non-employee Board
member would vest in full upon such change in control.


 


In addition to the cash
and equity compensation described above, all members of the Registrant’s Board
will be reimbursed for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending
meetings of the Board of Directors.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

September 4, 2012

s0827

Order 

September 4, 2012

145182

SEAN FEYEN, CRAIG BALAS, and

JOEY HUFNAGEL,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 145182

COA: 304137

Kent CC: 10-006394-CK

GREDE II, LLC,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 19, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.