alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Den Europæiske Unions C 447A/12.

| | ISSN 1977-0871 |
| --- | --- |
| Den Europæiske Unions
  Tidende | C 447A |
| | |
| Dansk udgave | Meddelelser og oplysninger | 61. årgang12. december 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0871

Den Europæiske Unions

Tidende

C 447A

Dansk udgave

Meddelelser og oplysninger

61. årgang12. december 2018

---

| Indhold | Side |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Øvrige meddelelser |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURER |
| | Den Europæisk Banktilsynsmyndighed |
| 2018/C 447 A/01 | Meddelelse om en ledig stilling som formand ved EBA (trin AD 15) — Paris, Frankrig — EBA TA 21/2018 | 1 |

Indhold

Side

V   Øvrige meddelelser

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURER

Den Europæisk Banktilsynsmyndighed

2018/C 447 A/01

Meddelelse om en ledig stilling som formand ved EBA (trin AD 15) — Paris, Frankrig — EBA TA 21/2018

1

---

| DA | |
| --- | --- |

DA

---

V Øvrige meddelelser

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURER

Den Europæisk Banktilsynsmyndighed

| 12.12.2018 | DA | Den Europæiske Unions Tidende | CA 447/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2018

DA

Den Europæiske Unions Tidende

CA 447/1

---

MEDDELELSE OM EN LEDIG STILLING SOM FORMAND VED EBA (TRIN AD 15) — PARIS, FRANKRIG — EBA TA 21/2018

(2018/C 447 A/01)

Den Europæiske Banktilsynsmyndighed (»EBA«) er en uafhængig EU-myndighed, som blev oprettet den 1. januar 2011 ved Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 1093/2010 (1).

Med det mål at forbedre EU's indre markeds funktion bidrager EBA til at sikre et effektivt og konsekvent reguleringsniveau af høj kvalitet inden for sine kompetenceområder. Desuden fremmer myndigheden offentlige værdier såsom det finansielle systems stabilitet, markeders og finansielle produkters gennemsigtighed samt beskyttelse af indskydere og investorer.

Den har blandt andet til opgave at forebygge tilsynsarbitrage og sikre ensartede vilkår, ligesom den styrker den internationale koordinering af tilsyn og fremmer tilsynskonvergensen og rådgivningen til EU-institutionerne inden for bankvirksomhed, betalinger, regulering af og tilsyn med e-penge samt relateret virksomhedsledelse og spørgsmål vedrørende revision og regnskabsaflæggelse.

Formanden er en fuldtidsansat, uafhængig fagkyndig og indgår i EBA's personale. Den pågældende står til ansvar over for EBA's tilsynsråd og holder løbende tilsynsrådet orienteret om, hvordan arbejdet i EBA forløber.

Se venligst EBA’s webside for et detaljeret stillingsopslag:

https://eba.europa.eu/about-us/careers

Ansøgninger, herunder et curriculum vitae helst i Europassformatet, et følgebrev og et udfyldt erklæringsskema, som er dateret og underskrevet, skal sendes på engelsk til følgende adresse: EBAChair-Applications@eba.europa.eu senest 11. januar 2019 kl. 12.00, lokal tid i London.

---

(1)  Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 1093/2010 af 24. november 2010 om oprettelse af en europæisk tilsynsmyndighed (Den Europæiske Banktilsynsmyndighed), om ændring af afgørelse nr. 716/2009/EF og om ophævelse af Kommissionens afgørelse 2009/78/EF (EUT L 331 af 15.12.2010, s. 12).

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7848

THOMAS HARLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

CHARLES CONDON, Attorney General of the State

of South Carolina; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA02-1341)

Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Harley, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Harley seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended

that relief be denied and advised Harley that failure to file

timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate

review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.

Despite this warning, Harley failed to object to the magistrate

judge’s recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate

judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of

the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been

warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See

Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Harley has waived appellate

review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. We also deny Harley’s motion asking the court to consider

documents as an amended complaint.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
* 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. 96-50044 Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1258 HIGUERA ROAD, SAN ELIZARIO, TEXAS WITH ALL APPURTENANCES AND IMPROVEMENTS THEREON,

Defendant,

BENJAMIN CHAGOYAN, ET AL.,

Claimants,

LILIA MENDOZA,

Claimant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-94-CV-386

_________________________________________________________________ August 27, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *-2-

Lilia Mendoza appeals the district court’s denial of her Fed.

R. C iv. P. 60(b) motion to vacate a default judgment in a

forfeiture proceeding pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881. Mendoza argues

that her motion should have been granted because she is uneducated,

her retained attorney filed an inadequate response to the complaint

for forfeiture and then withdrew from the case, the forfeiture

complaint failed to address the subdivision of the real pro perty

n amed in the complaint, and the order of forfeiture violates

principles of double jeopardy. Having reviewed the record, we find

that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying

Mendoza’s motion to vacate the default judgment. See U.S. v. One

1978 Piper Navajo PA-31 Aircraft

, 748 F.2d 316, 317 (5th Cir.

1984).

A F F I R M E D.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 141 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 141

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a permanent 
      extension of the credit for producing electricity from wind.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

  Mr. McHugh introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a perm
```
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER SHORTENING

BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR

MOTION TO MODIFY ORDER

EXTENDING PROVISIONAL

RELIEF DEADLINE

The Court is in receipt of plaintiff Waymo LLC’s motion to modify a prior order

extending a deadline for defendants to comply with provisional relief (Dkt. No. 485). 

Defendants shall please respond by TOMORROW AT 5:00 P.M.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 22, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 487 Filed 05/22/17 Page 1 of 1
In re David KISSI, petitioner.

No. 12-9656.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of prohibition denied.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
最佳选食 良好选食

鳀鱼

大西洋黄鱼 

大西洋鲭鱼

黑海鲈 

鲳鱼

鲶鱼

蛤蜊

鳕鱼

螃蟹

淡水龙虾 

龙利鱼 

黑线鳕

无须鳕

鲱鱼

美洲和多刺龙虾 

鲻鱼

牡蛎 

太平洋白腹鲭 

淡水和大洋鲈 

梭子鱼

欧鲽 

狭鳕

三文鱼

沙丁鱼

扇贝

河鲱

虾

鳐鱼

胡瓜鱼

舌鳎鱼 

鱿鱼 

罗非鱼

淡水鳟鱼

罐装淡金枪鱼 (包括鲣鱼) 

白鲑

牙鳕

扁鲹

牛鱼

鲤鱼

智利海鲈鱼/南极 鳕鱼

石斑鱼

大比目鱼

海豚鱼/鲯鳅鱼

安康鱼

岩鱼

银鳕

羊头鱼

鲷鱼

西班牙鲭鱼 

银花鲈鱼(深海)

方头鱼(大西洋) 

长鳍/白色金枪鱼

(罐装和新鲜/冷冻)

黄鳍金枪鱼 

犬牙石首鱼/海鳟 

白花鱼/太平洋黄花鱼

避免选食汞含量最高的鱼类

大耳马鲛 

马林鱼

新西兰红鱼

鲨鱼 

剑鱼

方头鱼(墨西哥湾) 

大目金枪鱼 

若您食用家人或朋友捕获的鱼,请查看鱼类和贝类建议,以了解您可以安全食用这些鱼类的频率。若未查询到建议,则在一周内仅

食一份量的鱼,避免再食用其他的鱼类。由于其汞或其他污染物质的含量,由家人和朋友捕获的部分鱼类(如大鲤鱼、鲶鱼、鳟鱼

和鲈鱼)更可能有鱼类公告。

最佳选食

良好选食

避免选食

选择各种含汞量较低的鱼。

虽然限制孕妇和哺乳期妇女以及幼儿摄取汞的含量非常重要,但有许多种类的鱼不但富含营养同时

汞含量也较低。

鱼类‡ 可提供支持儿童大脑发育的关键营养素。

吃鱼的建议

对于孕期或备孕、哺乳期妇女以及 1 至 11 岁幼儿

‡ 本建议将鱼类和贝类统称为“鱼”/本建议于 2021 年 10 月修订

儿童:

平均一份大约是:

1 盎司(1 至 3 岁)

2 盎司(4 至 7 岁)

3 盎司(8 至 10 岁)

4 盎司(11 岁)

每周从“最佳选食”列表中选择 2 份。

一份量是多少?可以用您的手掌来衡量。

孕妇和哺乳期妇女:

1 份是 4 盎司

每周从“最佳选食”列表中选择 2 到 3 份

(或是从“良好选食”列表中选择 1 份)。

此图表有助于您参照汞含量选择食用鱼的类型及数量。

鱼是健康饮食模式的一部分,能为孕妇和哺乳期妇女和/或幼儿提供关键营养素,

支持儿童的大脑发育:

• Ω-3 脂肪酸(称为 DHA 和 EPA)和 ω-6 脂肪酸

• 铁

• 碘(怀孕期间)

• 胆碱

胆碱还能支持婴儿脊髓的发育。鱼类富含铁和锌,能支持儿童的免疫系统。鱼也是

其他营养物质的来源,如蛋白质、维生素 B12、维生素 D 和硒。

www.FDA.gov/fishadvice

www.EPA.gov/fishadvice
健康的饮食模式是指基于

卡路里需求、根据推荐的食

用量摄入所有食物类别(蔬

菜、水果、谷物、乳制品和蛋

白质食物,其中便包括鱼)

的食物。健康的饮食模式应

包括富含维生素、矿物质和

其他有益健康的营养成分,

并且不含或含有少量添加

糖、饱和脂肪和钠的食物。

吃鱼还可以提供其他健康益处。

促进骨骼健康——降低髋部骨折的风险*

降低超重或肥胖的风险*

降低结肠癌和直肠癌的风险*

《美国人膳食指南》建议将鱼作为健康饮食模式的一部分。

《美国人膳食指南》建议:

• 基于 2,000 卡路里的饮食标准,每周至少吃 8 盎司的

海鲜(幼儿应减量§)。

• 孕期或哺乳期妇女每周可吃 8 至 12 盎司汞含量较低

的各种海鲜。

该建议支持《美国人膳食指南》的建议,反映了当前有关改善公共健康的营养科学。《美国人膳食指南》重视关注饮食模式及食物

和营养素特征对健康的影响。

§ 对于某些儿童,《美国人膳食指南》建议他们摄入高于此 FDA/EPA 建议含量的鱼类。《美国人膳食指南》指出,为了摄入更高含

量的鱼类,儿童应仅从“最佳选食”列表选择摄入汞含量较低的鱼类。——这些鱼类包括鳀鱼、大西洋鲭鱼、鲶鱼、蛤蜊、螃蟹、

淡水龙虾、龙利鱼 黑线鳕、鲻鱼、牡蛎、欧鲽、狭鳕、三文鱼、沙丁鱼、扇贝、河鲱、虾、舌鳎鱼、鱿鱼、罗非鱼、鳟鱼、牙鳕。

* 有适度的科学证据表明整体饮食模式与潜在的健康益处之间存在关系。

‡ 本建议将鱼类和贝类统称为“鱼”/本建议于 2021 年 10 月修订

 (续)

吃鱼的建议

对于孕期或备孕、哺乳期妇女以及 1 至 11 岁幼儿

www.FDA.gov/fishadvice	 www.EPA.gov/fishad

建议在怀孕期间摄入鱼类,因为适度的科学证据表明鱼类可以帮

助宝宝的认知发育。

有充足的证据表明,作为健康饮食模式的一部分,吃鱼可能对心

脏健康有益。包括鱼类的健康饮食模式还可能有其他好处。适度

的科学证据表明,鱼类摄入较多并且均衡涵盖其他食物类别(包

括蔬菜、水果、豆类、全谷物、低脂或脱脂乳制品、瘦肉和家禽、

坚果和不饱和植物油),而红肉和加工肉类、含糖食品和饮料以及

精制谷物摄入较少的饮食习惯与以下健康益处有关:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26426-26427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12054]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-286-000]


National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

May 11, 1995.
    Take Notice that on May 8, 1995, National Fuel Gas Supply 
Corporation (National), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to be 
effective June 1, 1995:

First Revised Sheet No. 147
First Revised Sheet No. 154
Second Revised Sheet No. 255
First Revised Sheet No. 256

    National states that First Revised Sheet No. 154 is being filed to 
reflect the Commission's modifications to Sec. 284.243(h) of its 
capacity release regulations in Order No. 577.
    National states that Second Revised Sheet No. 255 and First Revised 
Sheet No. 256 are being filed to eliminate affiliate transaction data 
from National's request for service form in accordance with Order No. 
566. National further states that First Revised Sheet No. 147 is being 
filed because the Order No. 566 series of orders made certain sections 
incorrect.
    National states that it is serving copies of the filing to its firm 
customers and interested state commissions.
    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, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Secs. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests should be filed on 
or before May 18, 1995. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestant 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 
[[Page 26427]] inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-12054 Filed 5-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Civil Minutes

Date: March 24, 2017 Judge: Jon S. Tigar

Time: 32 minutes

Case No. 3:17-cv-00795-JST

Case Name Lagree Technologies, Inc., et al. v. Spartacus 20th L.P., et al.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Chad E. Ziegler 

Paul J. Loh

Attorneys for Defendants: Robert P. Andris

Michael D. Kanach

Deputy Clerk: William Noble Court Reporter: Raynee Mercado

PROCEEDINGS

Motion to Extend Time for Defendants to File Their Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' 

Complaint for Patent Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Name 

Misappropriation, Unlawful and Fraudulent Business Practices, and California Common Law 

Unfair Competition (ECF No. 22)

RESULT OF HEARING

1. The Court ordered the Defendants to respond to the Complaint by April 7, 2017.

2. If the parties want the Court to conduct a case management conference prior to June 7, 

2017, they shall first meet and confer before making a request by contacting the 

Courtroom Deputy Clerk.

Case 3:17-cv-00795-JST Document 32 Filed 03/24/17 Page 1 of 1
Amendment to Officer Retention Plan Agreement



  
 Exhibit 10.31

  
 AMENDMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment Agreement”) is made and
entered into as of this 12th day of JANUARY, 2004, by and between COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO. CONSOLIDATED, a Delaware
corporation (the “Employer”), and DAVID V. SINGER, an employee of the Employer (the “Participant”). 
  
 W I T N E S S E T H: 
  
 WHEREAS, the Employer and the Participant entered into that certain “ORP Agreement” dated July 1, 2001 pursuant to
which Employer agreed to provide the Participant certain benefits under the Officer Retention Plan (ORP) of Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 (the “Plan”), subject to the terms and
conditions of the Plan; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Plan contains
provisions that reduce a participant’s “Benefit Earned” by fifty-percent (50%) in the event of a participant’s termination of employment prior to attaining the age of sixty (60); and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Employer and the Participant desire to amend the ORP Agreement
to provide that the foregoing benefit reduction provisions will not apply to the Participant unless his termination of employment occurs prior to his attaining the age of fifty-five (55); 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises and agreements set forth herein and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree to amend the ORP Agreement as follows: 
  
 1. Paragraph 1 of the ORP Agreement is hereby amended to add the following sentence to the end of said Paragraph: 
  
 “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the
definitions of “Normal Retirement” in Section 1.15 of the Plan and “Normal Retirement Date” in Section 1.16 of the Plan are hereby amended with respect to the Participant by deleting the phrase “age 60” and replacing it
with “age 55” in each such Section.” 
  
 2. The
Participant hereby acknowledges and agrees that the dollar amounts of the Participant’s “Benefit Earned” under the Plan set forth on the Schedule to the ORP Agreement are not affected by this Amendment Agreement. 
  
 3. Except as expressly modified hereby, the terms and provisions of the ORP
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
  









 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment Agreement as of the day and year first above
written. 
  

									
	 	 	 	 	 COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO. CONSOLIDATED

					
	 	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 /s/ Robert D. Pettus, Jr

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 (CORPORATE SEAL)
	 	 	 	 	 	 Name: ROBERT D. PETTUS, Jr.

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 Title: Executive VP and Assistant to Chairman

			
	 	 	 	 	 “Employer”

			
	 ATTEST:
	 	 	 	 
			
	 /s/ Umesh Kasbekar
	 	 	 	/s/ David V. Singer
	
	 	 	 	

	 Asst
	 	 	 	 	 	 DAVID V. SINGER

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 “Participant”
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT RUSSELL DREW,

Plaintiff,

v.

AVALON BAY COMMUNITIES INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00846-DMR 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On February 21, 2017, Pro se Plaintiff Robert Russell Drew (“Plaintiff”) filed suit in this 

Court. [Docket No. 1]. Plaintiff has failed to comply with a number of case-management 

deadlines. For example, Plaintiff has yet to serve the summons and complaint, even though the 

court reminded him of the service requirements set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). 

[Docket No. 12]. Additionally, Plaintiff has twice failed to submit the required Case Management 

Conference Statement. [Docket Nos. 11, 12]. Plaintiff also failed to appear at the July 5, 2017 

Initial Case Management Conference. [Docket No. 13]. 

In light of the above, the court ORDERS Plaintiff to respond in writing by July 13, 2017

and explain why his case should not be dismissed prejudice for failure to prosecute. Failure to 

timely respond may result in dismissal of this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2017

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu
EX-34.6
(logo) Crowe
Crowe Chizek and Company LLC
Member Horwath International


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


Audit Committee
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
West Palm Beach, Florida


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying report
"Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria", that
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's
Regulation AB for the Residential Mortgage Loans Platform (the "Platform") as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2007, excluding criteria 1122(1)(iii) and
1122(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the
activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. The Platform
consists of the asset-backed transactions and securities defined by management
in Appendix B of Management's Report. Management is responsible for the
Company's compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's
compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards established by
the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria for the Platform and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination
included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities constituting
the Platform and evaluating whether the Company performed servicing activities
related to those transactions and securities in compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the period covered by this report. Accordingly, our
testing may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed
transaction or security constituting the Platform. Further, our examination was
not designed to detect material noncompliance that may have occurred prior to
the period covered by this report and that may have affected the Company's
servicing activities during the period covered by this report. We believe that
our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination
does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion referred to above is fairly stated, in
all material respects, based on the aforementioned applicable servicing
criteria.


/s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Fort Lauderdale, Florida
March 6, 2008
Exhibit 10.19





AMENDMENT TO THE LIMITED ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 BETWEEN VEMICS, INC. (NOW iMEDICOR, INC.) AND CLEARLOBBY, INC.




Payment of 2,000,000 shares of restricted 144 Common Stock of Imedicor, Inc., a Nevada Corporation (formerly known as Vemics, Inc., and currently trading under the symbol VMCI) shall, upon the receipt by ClearLobby, Inc., (the acknowledgment of which shall be made by ClearLobby to Imedicor via electronic mail within two (2) business days
of receipt) be deemed as payment in full of all monies due and owing ClearLobby, Inc., from Vemics, Inc., (now known as Imedicor, Inc.) pursuant to the Agreement entered into on September 11, 2008 between ClearLobby, Inc., and Vemics, Inc.




Imedicor, Inc., agrees that upon the six (6) month anniversary of the issuance date of the aforementioned shares, Imedicor's general counsel shall provide, and Imedicor shall make every effort to ensure its counsel provides, within five (5) calendar days of request, a legal opinion that the restrictions on the aforementioned shares can
be removed, as long as the rules governing SEC Rule 144 that pertain to Imedicor and ClearLobby are met and satisfied.







AGREED:





iMedicor, Inc.:/s/ Fred Zolla
September 3, 2009Fred Zolla – CEO
DateClearLobby, Inc:/s/ Sean Hanlon
September 3, 2009Sean Hanlon - Owner
DateClearLobby, Inc:/s/ Greg Englehardt
September 3, 2009Greg Englehardt - Owner
Date