alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Second Department,

February, 1986

(February 3, 1986)

#### Aeron Aviation Corporation, Respondent, v Chemco International Leasing, Inc., Appellant.

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated May 30, 1985, as denied in part its motion for a protective order striking interrogatories and a request for documents and granted in part plaintiffs cross motion to compel defendant to answer the interrogatories and produce the requested documents.

*574Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, defendant’s motion for a protective order striking the interrogatories and request for documents granted in its entirety, and plaintiff’s cross motion to compel defendant to answer the interrogatories and produce the documents denied in its entirety.

Plaintiff’s numerous interrogatories and its request for documents are burdensome, oppressive, and, in many parts, inappropriate. In such a case, the interrogatories and request should be vacated rather than pruned, as it is counsel’s burden to draft and serve proper interrogatories and demands, and the courts will not correct palpably bad ones *(see, e.g., Martino v Mid-Island Hosp.,*73 AD2d 592; *Itzkoff v Allstate Ins. Co.,*59 AD2d 854; *Cramp v Cramp,*114 AD2d 835). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6031

HILTON LAWRENCE BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA98-3925-CCB)

Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 18, 1999

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hilton Lawrence Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Hilton Lawrence Brown appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. This court may generally

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(1994). Because Brown may be able to save this action by amending

his complaint, the district court’s order is not an appealable

final order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union

392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that a dismissal without prejudice is not reviewable unless the reasons

stated for the dismissal clearly disclose that no amendment to the

complaint could cure its defects). We therefore dismiss the appeal. 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
<PAGE>


                                                                  Exhibit 3.1


                              AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
                           BYLAWS OF SUNSOURCE INC.

         The Bylaws (the "Bylaws") of SunSource Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), are amended in accordance with Section 8.06 of the Bylaws as
follows pursuant to a resolution adopted at a meeting of the Company's Board
of Directors on September 24, 1998:

         Section 3.03 is amended and restated in its entirety to read as
follows:

                  SECTION 3.03. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the
         stockholders of the corporation may be called at any time only by the
         chairman or a majority of the board of directors.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-12378

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv-20010-FAM

VITALIL PYSARENKO, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CARNIVAL CORP.,

d.b.a. Carnival Cruise Lines, 

 Defendant - Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(November 12, 2014)

Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Case: 14-12378 Date Filed: 11/12/2014 Page: 1 of 3 
2

Pysarenko, the plaintiff in this case, filed a complaint against Carnival 

Corporation in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court in Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

Pysarenko alleges that he worked as a karaoke host aboard Carnival’s ship, the 

“Carnival Dream.” He alleges that, as a result of negligence by Carnival, he 

injured his back carrying Karaoke equipment in the course of his duties on 

November 30, 2010. He further alleges that Carnival failed to provide him with 

reasonable medical care and denied him the benefit of maintenance and cure. After 

removing the case to the Southern District of Florida, Carnival moved to dismiss 

the action and compel arbitration pursuant to the arbitration clause in the 

employment contract between Pysarenko and Carnival. The district court granted 

the motion. Pysarenko appeals, challenging that order.

Pysarenko presents five issues on appeal. First, Pysarenko argues that the 

choice-of-law clause in the arbitration provisions in his employment contract is

void under 45 U.S.C. § 55. Second, he argues that the foreign-forum clause in the 

arbitration provisions is void under 45 U.S.C. §§ 55 and 56. Third, he argues that 

the entire arbitration clause is void under 45 U.S.C. §§ 55 and 56 and 46 U.S.C. §

30104. Fourth, he argues that the arbitration clause is void as against public policy 

because the choice-of-law and choice-of-forum provisions operate in tandem as a 

prospective waiver of Pysarenko’s rights to pursue his statutory remedies under 

United States law. Fifth, he argues that the arbitration clause is void as against 

Case: 14-12378 Date Filed: 11/12/2014 Page: 2 of 3 
3

public policy for attempting to deprive Pysarenko of his Jones Act rights to pursue 

his claims in state court and have them tried by a jury.

Pysarenko admits that his fourth and fifth arguments are contrary to the law 

of this circuit, and seeks only to preserve them for further review. (Br. for 

Appellant at 2). The district court, in a well-reasoned opinion, carefully considered 

and properly rejected Pysarenko’s remaining arguments. (Order Granting Def.’s 

Mot. to Compel Arbitration and Den. Pl.’s Mot. to Remand, Doc. 37 at 3, 5, 9–10). 

We conclude that the court did not err. We affirm.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 14-12378 Date Filed: 11/12/2014 Page: 3 of 3
#### RENSSELAER COUNTY, Respondent, v. NATIONAL BANK OF TROY, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 15, 1898.)

Action by Rensselaer County against 'the National Bank of Troy.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Genaro Alberto NUNEZ, also known as Monkey, Appellant.

No. 07-2266.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 19, 2008.

Filed: Jan. 8, 2009.

Before MURPHY, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Genaro Alberto Nunez pled guilty to several drug counts. In sentencing him, the district court1 determined that Nunez was responsible for 310 pounds of marijuana seized from a car driven by a co-defendant. Nunez argues on appeal, as he did below, that he was responsible for only a portion of the 310 pounds, because the additional marijuana was not possessed in furtherance of a jointly undertaken criminal activity and was not reasonably foreseeable to him. *See*U.S.S.G. § IB 1.3(a)(1)(B) (relevant conduct for case involving “jointly undertaken criminal activity” includes all reasonably foreseeable acts of others in furtherance of criminal activity).

Foreseeability aside, we hold that Nunez was responsible for the additional marijuana under U.S.S.G. § lB1.3(a)(l)(A) (relevant conduct includes all acts “committed, aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, procured, or willfully caused” by defendant), because he pled guilty to aiding and abetting his codefendant’s possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. *See*U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3, comment, (n.2) (requirement of reasonable foreseeability does not apply to conduct that defendant personally undertakes, aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, procures, or willfully causes; such conduct is addressed under subsection (a)(1)(A)); *United States v. Goings,*200 F.3d 539, 544 (8th Cir.2000) (this court may affirm sentence on any grounds supported by record); *cf. United States v. Strange,*102 F.3d 356, 358-61 (8th Cir.1996) (holding that defendant who *329arranged for marijuana to be shipped from supplier to third party was responsible for quantity of cocaine shipped even though he was unaware that cocaine had been sent; under § lB1.3(a)(l)(A), and without regard to reasonable foreseeability, defendant was accountable at sentencing for full quantity of all illegal drugs because he aided, abetted, and willfully caused shipment with expectation of receiving some type of illegal drug to distribute).

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is affirmed.

1

. The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.12

                     FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     This First Amendment to Employment Agreement ("Amendment"), effective as of
July 28, 2000, is made by and between NANOGEN, INC., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), and MICHAEL D. MOORE (the "Executive").

                                    RECITALS

     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive have entered into an Employment
Agreement, dated June 15, 2000 (the "Employment Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive wish to amend the Employment Agreement
as described herein.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and Executive, in consideration of the
Executive's continued employment with the Company, agree as follows:

                                      TERMS

1.   SECTION 280G. In Article III, Section E SECTION 280G relating to
     restrictions on payments made pursuant to the Employment Agreement that may
     be considered "excess parachute payments" during Change of Control events
     as defined therein, shall be deleted in its entirety.

2.   REMAINDER OF AGREEMENT. The other terms and conditions contained in the
     Employment Agreement shall remain in effect pursuant to the Employment
     Agreement and such terms and conditions, where applicable, shall also
     govern this Amendment.

3.   GOVERNING LAW. This Amendment shall be construed in accordance with the
     laws of the State of California, notwithstanding its conflicts of law
     provisions.

4.   EXECUTIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT. Executive acknowledges (a) that he has consulted
     with or has had the opportunity to consult with independent counsel of his
     own choice concerning this Amendment, and has been advised to do so by the
     Company, and (b) that he has read and understands this Amendment, is fully
     aware of its legal effect, and has entered into it freely based on his own
     judgment.

5.   COUNTERPARTS. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts,
     all of which taken together constituted one and the same agreement.


<PAGE>

       Executed by the parties as of the day and year first above written.

                                                 NANOGEN, INC.

                                                 By:  /s/ HOWARD C. BIRNDORF
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                         Howard C. Birndorf
                                                         Chairman and Chief
                                                         Executive Officer


                                                 EXECUTIVE
                                                       /s/ MICHAEL D. MOORE
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                         Michael D. Moore
Amendment to Change in Control Severance Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
 AMENDMENT TO CHANGE IN CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT 
 MONTEREY
GOURMET FOODS, INC. 
 WHEREAS, Monterey Gourmet Foods, Inc. (the “Company”) and Eric C. Eddings
(“Executive”) are parties to a Change In Control Severance Agreement dated April 3, 2008 (the “Agreement”), and the parties now desire to clarify the Agreement and amend the Agreement to comply with Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Section 409A”). 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Agreement is amended as follows:

 A.    Section 2 of the Agreement is revised to read as follows: 
 The Executive identified below shall be entitled to receive severance pay upon his (1) termination of employment by the
Company, or (2) a reduction in title or reassignment which (i) results in a substantial diminution of his position, duties or responsibilities prior to the Change in Control and (ii) precipitates a voluntary resignation by the
Executive, occurring in either case at any time after the commencement of negotiations resulting in a Change in Control and the date which is six months after such Change in Control. 
 B.    The following new sentence is added to the end of section 4: 
 The first monthly installment shall be made within thirty (30) days following the Executive’s “separation from service”
within the meaning of Section 409A. 
 C.    A new section 8 is added to read as follows: 

8.    Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the Agreement shall be
interpreted and administered in accordance with Section 409A and regulations and other guidance issued thereunder to the extent applicable. For purposes of determining whether any payment made pursuant to the Agreement results in a
“deferral of compensation” within the meaning of Treasury Regulation 1.409A-1(b), the Company shall maximize the exemptions described in such section, as applicable. If any amount that constitutes a “deferral of compensation”
within the meaning of Treasury Regulation 1.409A-1(b) is payable to a specified employee (as defined in Treasury Regulation 1.409A-1(i)) within six (6) months following separation from service, then payment of each such amount shall be deferred
and all amounts so deferred shall be paid in a lump sum on the first payroll payment date following expiration of six (6) months following separation from service, and any remaining amounts due under this Agreement shall be paid in accordance
with the normal payment dates specified for them herein. Any such delayed payments shall be paid without interest. For purposes of this Agreement, each amount to be paid or benefit to be provided shall be construed as a separate identified payment
for purposes of Section 409A. 
 DATED: December 11, 2009. 
  

			
	Monterey Gourmet Foods, Inc. (“Company”)
		
	By:	 	/s/ Scott S. Wheeler
	Title:	 	C.F.O.
	
	“Executive”
	
	 /s/ Eric C. Eddings
  

	Eric C. Eddings
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.                  

###### Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board

# TIME AND DATE:

 July 29, 2021, 2:00 p.m. EDT.

# PLACE:

                         The meeting will be held virtually via ZOOM. The access information will be provided by email to registrants. Registration is required via the below link:                         *https://www.zoomgov.com/​meeting/​register/​vJItcO2upz0vHfhSClfE_​1y6RQrMF_​rI7QA.*

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

# PLACE:

 Public Meeting Hosted via Zoom.

# STATUS:

 Open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) will convene a public meeting on Thursday, July 29, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. EDT. This meeting serves to fulfill its quarterly July public meeting requirement. The Board will review the CSB's progress in meeting its mission and highlight safety products newly released through investigations and safety recommendations.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

                        Hillary Cohen, Communications Manager, at                         *public@csb.gov*                         or (202) 446-8094. Further information about this public meeting can be found on the CSB website at:                         *www.csb.gov.*

# ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

## Background

The CSB is an independent federal agency charged with investigating incidents and hazards that result, or may result, in the catastrophic release of extremely hazardous substances. The agency's Board Members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. CSB investigations look into all aspects of chemical accidents and hazards, including physical causes such as equipment failure as well as inadequacies in regulations, industry standards, and safety management systems.

## Public Participation

The meeting is free and open to the public. This meeting will only be available via ZOOM. Close captions (CC) will be provided.

Dated: July 11, 2021.

Tamara Qureshi,

Assistant General Counsel, Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.

[FR Doc. 2021-15135 Filed 7-13-21; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6350-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 36765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14833]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[212A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900253G]


Indian Gaming; Approval of Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compact 
in the State of South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice publishes the approval of the class III gaming 
compact between the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse 
Reservation (Tribe) and the State of South Dakota (State).

DATES: The compact takes effect on July 13, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of 
Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary--Policy and 
Economic Development, Washington, DC 20240, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7505140019145b1d14070135171c145b121a03"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0474657168652a6c65767044666d652a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>, (202) 
219-4066.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 11 of the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act (IGRA), Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq., the 
Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the Federal Register notice 
of approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class 
III gaming activities on Indian lands. As required by 25 CFR 293.4, all 
compacts and amendments are subject to review and approval by the 
Secretary. The Compact allows for an unlimited number of roulette 
tables, crap tables, and keno devices. The Compact is approved.

Bryan Newland,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021-14833 Filed 7-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Amendment No. 3 to Statement of Work Number 8 to Goods Agreement



 Exhibit 10.156 
  
 

 
 3039 E CORNWALLIS RD 
 RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK NC 27709-2195 
 October 1, 2009 
 Mr. Mike Harrison 
 Brocade Communications
Systems, Inc. 
 1745 Technology Drive 
 San Jose, CA 95110 
 Subject: Amendment 3 to SOW#8 of the IBM/Brocade Goods Agreement ROC-P-68 
 This letter (the “Amendment”) serves as Amendment Number 3 to SOW#8, including all amendments thereto (“SOW#8”) of the Goods
Agreement ROC-P-68 (the “Agreement”), which the parties hereto do mutually agree to amend as follows 
 1. Delete Attachment A,
Pricing in its entirety and replace with the attached Attachment A, Pricing. 
 2. The effective date of this Amendment shall be the date on the
top of this Amendment (the “Effective Date”). 
 The parties acknowledge that they have read this Amendment, understand it, and agree
to be bound by its terms and conditions. All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Goods Agreement or the SOW #8. All other terms and conditions of the Goods Agreement and SOW#8 that are unaffected by the
revisions set forth in this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. Further, the parties agree that this Amendment and the Goods Agreement and SOW#8 are the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between the parties, superseding
all proposals or other prior agreement, oral or written, and all other communications between the parties relating to this subject. 
  

											
	Accepted and Agreed To:	    	Accepted and Agreed To:
		
	International Business Machines Corporation	    	Brocade Communications Systems, Inc.
	By:	  	 /s/ Michelle B. Wright
	  	 10/2/09
	    	By:	  	 /s/ Matt Taylor
	  	 10/2/09

		  	Authorized Signature	  	Date	    		  	Authorized Signature	  	Date
					
	 Michelle B. Wright
	  		    		  	 Matt Taylor
	  	
	Type or Print Name	  		    		  	Type or Print Name	  	
					
	 GCM – Storage OEM Procurement
	  		    		  	 Sr. Dir., OEM Services
	  	
	Title & Organization	  		    		  	Title & Organization	  	

  

							
	Address:	 		    	Address:	  	1745 Technology Drive
		 		    		  	San Jose, CA 95110

 IBM Brocade/Confidential 








					
	Accepted and Agreed To:
	
	Brocade Communications Switzerland, SarL
			
	By:	 	 /s/ U. Plechschmidt
	 	 02-October-2009

		 	Authorized Signature	 	Date
		
	 Ulrich Plechschmidt
	 	
	Type or Print Name	 	
		
	 Vice President EMEA
	 	
	Title & Organization	 	


 IBM Brocade/Confidential 







 ATTACHMENT A 
 [**] Pages 3-38 have been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions. 
 IBM Brocade/Confidential
Exhibit 12.1

Regal Entertainment Group  Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges  (in millions, except ratios)

Year Ended
12/30/2004

Year Ended
12/29/2005

Year Ended
12/28/2006

Year Ended
12/27/2007

Year Ended
1/1/2009Pretax Income

$
142.0

$
152.5

$
144.0

$
605.9

$
123.3Fixed ChargesInterest Expense, net of capitalized interest


93.6


114.4


124.4


126.1


123.4Interest Capitalized





0.7


0.8


1.2


0.7Amortization of Debt Costs


5.2


5.2


5.6


6.3


7.2One-third of Rent Expense


95.7


103.5


107.7


112.0


121.1Total Fixed Charges


194.5


223.8


238.5


245.6


252.4Earnings


336.5


376.3


382.5


851.5


375.7Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


1.7
x

1.7
x

1.6
x

3.5
x

1.5
xDeficiency

$


$


$


$


$
Rent Expense

$
287.0

$
310.5

$
323.2

$
335.9

$
363.3


---



QuickLinks