alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.2.10
                             As of February 8, 2006

Globis Overseas Fund, Ltd.
60 Broad Street
New York, NY  10004
Attn: Paul Packer

Gentlemen:

The undersigned hereby agrees to transfer to you 4,000 shares ("Shares") of
common stock, par value $.001 per share, of Asia Automotive Acquisition
Corporation ("Company"), a blank check company organized for the purpose of
effecting a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition or other similar
business combination with an automotive operating business that has its primary
operating facilities located in Asia, in exchange for $100.

By agreeing to the foregoing transfer, you understand that the Shares have not
been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities
Act"); that you are acquiring the Shares for your account for investment
purposes only; that you have no present intention of selling or otherwise
disposing of the Shares in violation of the Securities Act; that you are an
"accredited investor" as defined by Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under
the Securities Act; and that, based solely on a review of the Registration
Statement on Form S-1, as amended to date, filed with the SEC, you are familiar
with the proposed business, management, financial condition, and affairs of the
Company.

Very truly yours,



Rudy Wilson
For Asia Development Capital LLC


Agreed to:
Globis Overseas Fund, Ltd.


By:
   ----------------
    Name:
    Title:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
REZA NAGAHI, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT; et al., Defendants - Appellees. No. 11-17320 D.C. No. 5:07-cv-06268-JF
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted February 10, 2014 San Francisco, California Before: REINHARDT and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and SESSIONS, District Judge. ** The State defendants have advised the court that “[a]lthough this case has a long and complex history, the result in this Court should be short and simple: a 

# FILED
JUL 11 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable William K. Sessions III, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, sitting by designation.remand to the District Court so that Petitioner Reza Nagahi might be provided with the two possible forms of relief to whic h he may be eligible: the appropriate measure of Additional Trade Readjustment Allowance monetary benefits to which he is entitled by statute, and a written no tification regarding his application for Remedial Education benefits.” Acco rdingly, we REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings in accordance with the above.

2
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 March 15, 2006
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)
 MSX International, Inc.
  Delaware
    
    333-49821
    
    38-3323099(State or other jurisdiction
    
    (Commission
    
    (IRS Employerof incorporation)
    
    File Number)
    
    Identification No.)
 1950 Concept Drive, Warren, Michigan
 48091
 (248) 299-1000
  o
    
    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)o
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  ITEM 1.01. ENTRY INTO A MATERIAL DEFINITIVE AGREEMENTITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, PRO FORMA FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND EXHIBITSSIGNATUREFifth Amendment to Amended & Restated Credit Agreement    Table of Contents  
 ITEM 1.01. ENTRY INTO A MATERIAL DEFINITIVE AGREEMENT
   
    
    Extend the maturity date of the Credit Agreement from August 1, 2006 to January 15, 2007;
    
    Reduce the aggregate commitments under the Credit Agreement from $45 million to $25
million subject to limitations based on domestic accounts receivable and cash
collateral held in blocked accounts in connection with prepayments of obligations under
the Credit Agreement;
    
    Allow for future permanent reductions of commitment and related borrowings via use
of funds from any asset sales held in blocked accounts by the bank; and
    
    Modify certain covenants and restrictions on the Companys ability to borrow under
the Credit Agreement, including the elimination of all commitments related to
non-domestic subsidiaries of the Company.
    
 ITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, PRO FORMA FINANCIAL INFORMATION
AND EXHIBITS
  10.1
    
    Fifth Amendment to Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of
March 15, 2006 among the Company, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and the other parties
signatory thereto.




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURE
    By:
    
    /s/ Frederick K. MinturnFrederick K. MinturnExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer




---



##### Table of Contents



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No.
    
    Exhibit Description10.1
    
    
    Fifth Amendment to amended and Restated Credit
Agreement dated as of March 15, 2006 among the Company, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and the other parties signatory thereto.
| (1) | The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                            |   |                                    |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                                                            |   |                                    |   |
| Date:     March 13, 2015      | By:    |  /s/ Christopher J. Reynolds  |   |
|                                                                            |   | Christopher J. Reynolds                 |   |
|                                                                            |   | Vice President Finance and CFO          |   |
|                                                                            |   |                                    |   |
Trentair Lavent BINGHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-245

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 20, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Gene MAST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-377

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 1, 2018 Rehearing Denied June 8, 2018

Gene Mast, Polk City, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lori N. Hagan, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WALLIS, EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Description of Mosaic Management Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.iii.g. 
 Pursuant to the Management Incentive Plan (“MIP”) of The Mosaic Company (the “Company”), key managers of the Company and its subsidiaries, including executive officers, are eligible for annual cash
incentive compensation based upon the attainment of business performance goals that are pre-established by the Board of Directors of the Company, upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee or a subcommittee of outside directors.
Attainment of the performance measures determines the amount of the incentive payment for executive officers and all or a portion of the amount of the incentive payment for other participants. Threshold, target and maximum payout levels are set
based upon the extent to which the specified performance measures are attained. Target annual incentive awards for executive officers range from 45% to 110% of base salary for the fiscal year ending May 31, 2009. The Corporate performance
measures for the fiscal year ending May 31, 2009 are (i) consolidated operating earnings (“operating earnings”) and (ii) average consolidated working capital (“average working capital”), weighted 80% on the
operating earnings measure and 20% on the average working capital measure. The Corporate performance measures apply to all executive officers, except that the performance measures for executive officers who are leaders of the Company’s business
units are based 60% on consolidated operating earnings and average consolidated working capital and 40% on operating earnings and average working capital of their respective business units. The plan has a minimum level for both the operating
earnings measure and the average working capital measure at which payments begin. In addition, the plan has a separate threshold for the operating earnings measure below which no payout will be made under the average working capital measure. The
maximum payout percent for both the operating earnings measure and the average working capital measure is 225% of the target annual incentive award.
John Brandt BAXTER, in His Capacity as the Independent Administrator of the Succession of August C. Baxter v. Robert C. LEWIS

NO. 2018-01377

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 14, 2018

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, J.
Leonard Ivins,  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 Oncolin Therapeutics,
Inc. on Form 10-K for the annual period ended March 31, 2009, 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  Form 10-K fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of Oncolin Therapeutics, Inc.





Date:  May
4, 2010





By:
                /s/ J. Leonard IvinsJ.
      Leonard IvinsPrincipal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ardent Health
Services LLC (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, R. Dirk Allison, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 Company.


                                          /s/ R. Dirk Allison
                                          ------------------------------
                                          R. Dirk Allison
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          March 26, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 971 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 971

    To prohibit the sale or trade to another community of community 
                 development block grant award amounts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2013

  Mr. Paulsen (for himself and Mr. McHenry) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To prohibit the sale or trade to another community of community 
                 development block grant award amounts.

    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 ``Ensuring Proper Community 
Investments Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON SALE OR TRADE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK 
              GRANT AWARDS.

    (a) Prohibition.--Section 105 of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305) is amended by adding at the 
end the following new subsection:
    ``(i) Prohibition on Sale or Trade of Awards.--A metropolitan city, 
urban county, unit of general local government, or Indian tribe, or 
insular area that receives a grant of amounts under this title from the 
Secretary or through a State allocation pursuant to section 106(d) may 
not sell, trade, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of such 
amounts to or for any other metropolitan city, urban county, unit of 
general local government, Indian tribe or insular area.''.
    (b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
shall issue any regulations necessary to carry out section 105(i) of 
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as added by the 
amendment made by subsection (a) of this section, not later than the 
expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Clarence CUNNINGHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-928

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The Honorable Raner C. Collins, United States District Judge for the **

District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JAMES ROY BARRON, Jr.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-15526

D.C. Nos. 2:96-cr-00190-JAM-

 GGM-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted April 15, 2010

San Francisco, California

Before: SCHROEDER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and COLLINS, District

Judge.** 

James Barron appeals the district court’s denial of his motion under 28

U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his sentence. Barron claims he was denied his Sixth

FILED

JUL 12 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Amendment right to effective counsel when his lawyer prevented him from

testifying on his own behalf. 

Barron has not shown ineffective assistance, because he failed to object

when his lawyer did not call him as a witness. See United States v. Nohara, 3 F.3d

1239, 1243-44 (9th Cir. 1993). The district court evidentiary hearing on his

ineffectiveness claim demonstrates that Barron was not afraid to assert himself in

court, as he fired his first lawyer on the eve of trial. Barron also testified on his

own behalf in two previous trials, leading to prior convictions, so he was well

aware of his right to testify. 

Barron has also failed to demonstrate that, even assuming there was some

failure on the part of his counsel, it resulted in prejudice. See Strickland v.

Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). As the district court found, had Barron

testified, the government would have been able to impeach his testimony with

three prior felony drug convictions. See Dows v. Wood, 211 F.3d 480, 487 (9th

Cir. 2000). A confidential informant and police officer also both testified at trial to

witnessing Barron engage in drug deals. 

Barron’s claim that he was denied his right to testify is procedurally barred

because he failed to raise this claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Guess,

203 F.3d 1143, 1145 (9th Cir. 2000). A defendant waives his right to testify if he
3

does not object before the verdict is read. See United States v. Pino-Noriega, 189

F.3d 1089, 1095 (9th Cir. 1999). Barron is, therefore, incorrect that this claim

required evidence from outside the trial court record and that he could not have

raised it on direct appeal. See Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614, 621-22

(1998). 

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 606 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.606

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
815 County Road 23 in Tyrone, New York, as the ``Specialist Christopher 
                      Scott Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SPECIALIST CHRISTOPHER SCOTT POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 815 County Road 23 in Tyrone, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Specialist Christopher Scott Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Specialist 
Christopher Scott Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 18, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 5, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 512 to Competitive Product List*. Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-651, K2025-650.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-29843 Filed 12-17-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
H. R., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1520

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EXHIBIT 13.1



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



In connection with the annual report of MAG Silver Corp. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel T. MacInnis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Daniel T. MacInnis



Name: Daniel T. MacInnis

Title: Chief Executive Officer

June 15, 2007





A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the Form 20-F to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 20-F), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
EXHIBIT 32.1


      CERTIFICATION OF PETER CUNNINGHAM PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,  Peter  Cunningham,   Chief  Executive  Officer  of  AXM  Pharma,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     1)   The  Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB of the  Company  for the period
          ended  September  30, 2003 (the  "Report"),  (fully  complies with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


  Date:  November 18, 2003             By: /s/ Peter Cunningham
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                               Peter Cunningham
                                               Chief Executive Officer President