alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
sitm-ex101_98.htm



Exhibit 10.1

AMENDMENT NO.2 TO DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT

 

THIS AMENDMENT NO.2 TO DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (the "Amendment No.2"), effective as of the Effective Date as defined below, is made and entered into by and between SiTime Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Manufacturer"), a Delaware corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, USA, with its principal office at 5451 Patrick Henry Drive Santa Clara, CA 95054 U.S.A. and MegaChips Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Distributor"), a Japanese corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Japan, with its principal office at 1-1-1 Miyahara, Yodogawa-ku, Osaka, 532-0003 Japan. (hereinafter referred to individually as "Party" and collectively "Parties")

 

Recitals

 

WHEREAS, under the terms and conditions of Distribution Agreement dated April l, 2015 between the Parties (as amended by Amendment to Distribution Agreement dated January l, 2016 between the Parties) ("Agreement"), Manufacturer appointed Distributor as an authorized distributor for the Products (as defined in Exhibit A of the Agreement) within the Territory (as defined in Exhibit B of the Agreement), and Distributor accepted such appointment.

 

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to amend the definition of the Territory.

 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the Parties agree as follows:

 


	
 
	
1.
	
The Exhibit B ("Territory") of the Agreement shall be wholly replaced by the Attachment to this Amendment No.2.




 


	
 
	
2.
	
Unless otherwise amended in this Amendment No.2, the original terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




 


	
 
	
3.
	
The amendment herein shall become effective as of the date on which the last signing Party will affix its signature ("Effective Date").




 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment No.2 to be signed and accepted by their duly authorized representatives as of the day and year written below.

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTORMANUFACTURER

 

 

MegaChips CorporationSiTime Corporation

 

 

 

By: /s/ Yoshimasa HayashiBy: /s/ Lionel Bonnot

Name: Yoshimasa Hayashi Name: Lionel Bonnot

Title: Senior Managing DirectorTitle: EVP Sales and BD

Date: 5/21/2021Date: 5/19/2021




 



Exhibit 10.1

 

 

Attachment

EXHIBIT B

TERRITORY

Distributor shall have non-exclusive distribution rights in the Territory listed below for all of Manufacture's products, including, but not limited to, the Products listed in Exhibit A, the details of which Territory and products may be agreed upon by the Parties from time to time on an account-by­ account basis.

 

The Territory shall be:

 

World-Wide
|                             |                                                                                                                       |
|-----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (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 result of operations of the Company. |

|        |                                       |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | /S/Frank C. Condella                  |
|   | Frank C. Condella                     |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|   | March 10, 2011                   |
Minute Order

i

United States District Court, Northern District of Iinois

Kabke of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other
or Magistrate Judge John F. Grady than Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 03 C 5866 DATE 12/8/2004
CASE Stephen M. Lee vs. RCN Corporation et al
TITLE
[In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
f the ion bei ted.
MOTION: of the motion being presented.)
DOCKET ENTRY:
qd) im} Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.]
(2) Oo Brief in support of motion due
(3) o Answer brief to motion due . Reply to answer brief due
(4) a Ruling/Hearing on set for at
(5) a Status hearing{held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at
(6) QO Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at :
(7) oO Trial[set for/re-set for] on at
(8) a [Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to at
(9) a This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
OFRCP4(m) (Local Rule 41.1 CFRCP41(a)(1) CO FRCP41(a)(2).
do) of (Other docket entry] Status hearing held. It is ordered that plaintiff's claim against RCN
Corporation is dismissed with prejudice because plaintiff plans to proceed against RCN in the bankruptcy
court. Further, plaintiff’s claim as to Robert Curry is remanded to the Circuit Court of Cook County for
lack of jurisdiction.
addy a [For further detail see order (on reverse side offattached to) the original minute order.]
No notices required, advised in open court,
No notices required, umber of notices
Notices mailed by judge’s staff.
Notified counsel by telephone.
vo | Docketing to mail notices,
Mail AO 450 form.
Copy to judge/magistrate judge,
courtroom
AMM deputy’s
WA initials - —
Date/time received in
central Clerk’s Office mating depuy initials
Crowell Law

PO Box 923

Salem, Oregon 97308

Phone: 503-581-1240

Case No: 3:14-cv-01407

14-61624

Case No: 3:14-cv-01407 Voltage Pictures LLC et al v Peter Pecsok

Type Date Description Quantity

Service 08/29/2014 Review of data and defendant observed activities, draft

complaint (0.7 apportioned)

0.60

Expense 09/01/2014 Reimbursable expense: Filing Fee - $400, USDC Oregon 1.00

Service 09/01/2014 Draft complaint and associated documents, file (0.8 apportioned) 0.80

Service 09/02/2014 Prepare and file motion for expedited hearing (0.6 apportioned) 0.60

Service 09/09/2014 Updating dockets and review of file with exhibits, preparing

judges copy and subpoena for Comcast.

0.20

Service 09/10/2014 Review order for discovery, prepare and serve subpoena for

discovery (0.3 apportioned)

0.30

Service 09/10/2014 Review of file and status, notes to file and client 0.2 0.20

Service 10/15/2014 Review of file, draft and file motion and report to the court 0.40

Service 10/16/2014 Review of case with client, notes to file (apportioned) 0.10

Service 10/18/2014 Review of subpoena response; Research of subscriber and

data; Review download record and volume of activity; crossreference with subscriber data and identity; prepared exhibit and

outline for subscriber; letter to subscriber and notes to file.

1.70

Expense 10/20/2014 Reimbursable expense: Comcast Subpoena fee 1.00

Service 10/22/2014 Review of file and status with Court; Check for subscriber data

and response, notes to file

0.20

Service 10/24/2014 Review of file, call to subscriber; confirm no outside activity and

position as defendant; notes to file and letter to subscriber

outlining case options and possible resolution.

1.00

Service 11/06/2014 Review of file and defendant activity; Prepare and file First

Amended Complaint and Summons

1.10

EXHIBIT 1

Case 3:14-cv-01407-AC Document 27-1 Filed 03/22/15 Page 1 of 2
Service 11/11/2014 Review of file and service status, check infringement data;

attempt to reach defendant; notes to file

0.30

Service 11/17/2014 Review of service report and file, notes to file and schedule 0.20

Service 11/28/2014 Confirm Service, notes to file, file executed summons 0.30

Expense 12/17/2014 Reimbursable expense: Summons - Service 1.00

Service 12/18/2014 Review of file and docket; attempt to reach defendant; notes to

file; prepare, file and serve notice of default.

0.30

Service 12/29/2014 Review of file; letter to defendant on status and resolution; draft

and file motion for default; notes to file

0.90

Service 01/31/2015 Review of file and status; letter to defendant on default and

resolution.

0.40

Service 02/27/2015 Prepare and file motion for default judgment, service on

defendant

0.90

EXHIBIT 1

Case 3:14-cv-01407-AC Document 27-1 Filed 03/22/15 Page 2 of 2
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Foreign Disease-Weed Science Research: Frederick, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Frederick, Maryland Foreign Disease-Weed Science Research People & Locations







Angie  Burgos

(Angie Burgos)
                        Foreign Disease-Weed Science Research

                        




                        
                        ORISE participant
                        Phone: (301) 619-7313
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TIMOTHY SCOTT ROMANETTI, JR.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 189 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TIMOTHY SCOTT ROMANETTI, JR.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 190 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 27th day of December, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

FRANK J. BOSLET JR.,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 697 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of January, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
#### In the Matter of Carleto A., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 74] —

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Allen G. Alpert, J.), entered on or about April 11, 2011, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and placed him on enhanced supervision probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and imposing a period of enhanced supervision probation. This disposition, which was recommended by the Department of Probation, was the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs and the community’s need for protection *(see Matter of Katherine*W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). Appellant committed the underlying offense in an aggressive manner, his academic and attendance record at school was poor, he was in need of substance abuse counseling, and his supervision at home was inadequate. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Saxe, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1510

To direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture

to convey certain lands to the county of Rio Arriba, New Mexico.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

NOVEMBER 9, 1997

Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. BINGAMAN) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary

of Agriculture to convey certain lands to the county

of Rio Arriba, New Mexico.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. OLD COYOTE ADMINISTRATIVE SITE.

4 (a) CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY.—Not later than

5 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec6 retary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture

7 shall convey by quit-claim deed to the county of Rio

8 Arriba, New Mexico, subject to the terms and conditions

9 stated in subsection (b), all right, title, and interest of the
2

•S 1510 IS

1 United States in and to the land (including all improve2 ments on the land) known as the ‘‘Old Coyote Administrative Site’’ located approximately 1 3 ⁄2 mile east of the Village

4 of Coyote, New Mexico on State Road 96, comprising 1

5 tract of 130.27 acres and 1 tract of 276.76 acres.

6 (b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—

7 (1) CONSIDERATION.—The conveyance de8 scribed in subsection (a) shall be in consideration of

9 an amount that is agreeable to the Secretary of the

10 Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the coun11 ty of Rio Arriba, New Mexico, payable in full within

12 the 6-month period referred to in subsection (a), or,

13 at the option of the county, in 20 annual payments

14 due on January 1 of the first year beginning after

15 the date of enactment of this Act and annually

16 thereafter until the total amount due has been paid.

17 The county shall not be charged interest on amounts

18 owed the United States for the conveyance.

19 (2) RELEASE.—On conveyance of the property

20 under subsection (a), the county shall release the

21 United States from any liability for claims relating

22 to the property.

23 (3) REVERSION.—The conveyance under sub24 section (a) shall be a conveyance fee simple title to

25 the property, subject to reversion to the United
3

•S 1510 IS

1 States if the property is used for other than public

2 purposes or if the consideration requirements under

3 paragraph (1) are not met.

Æ
December 1, 2006


 

 

December 2, 2008

 

 

Andrew Cogan

New York, NY

Dear Andrew:

It is our great pleasure to inform you that you will be a participant in the 2009 Knoll, Inc. Incentive Compensation Program.

We need to do three things to succeed in 2009.  Improve our gross margins, continue to build on the sales and marketing initiatives that allowed us to gain share in 2007 and 2008, and diligently manage our spending.

Our success in 2009 will be a direct result of your ability to accomplish these objectives and assist Knoll in achieving its 2009 operating profit plan.

If you achieve this goal and Knoll makes the 2009 operating profit plan, you can qualify for a total target incentive payment of $1,000,000.

This award is subject to our approval and that of the Knoll, Inc. Board of Directors, which may exercise discretion in adjusting your award up or down based on factors the Board of Directors deems appropriate, including Knoll's performance relative to the industry, other macroeconomic factors and your individual performance.  You must be employed by Knoll on the date this award is distributed in order to receive this incentive.

We have great confidence in your ability to help Knoll profitably grow and look forward to being able to present you with your award in early 2010.

 

 

/s/ Burt Staniar

Burt Staniar
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MALBCO HOLDINGS, LLC, a

Washington Limited Liability Company, No. 03:14-cv-00947-PK

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BHUPENDRA PATEL and NILA PATEL; ORDER

HEETAN PATEL and HEETAL PATEL-MANANI;

and MUKESH PATEL, 

 Defendants.

HERNANDEZ, District Judge,

On July 21, 2015, Magistrate Judge Papak issued an Order (#113) in which he granted

Plaintiff's motion to compel. On January 28, 2016, Defendants filed objections to the Order. 

The matter is now before me pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a).

In accordance with Rule 72(a), "[w]hen a pretrial matter not dispositive of a party's claim

or defense is referred to a magistrate judge to hear and decide, the magistrate judge must

promptly conduct the required proceedings and, when appropriate, issue a written order stating

the decision." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). The standard of review for an order with objections is

1 - ORDER
"clearly erroneous" or "contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (applying the "clearly

erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review for nondispositive motions). If a ruling on a

motion is not determinative of "a party's claim or defense," it is not dispositive and, therefore, is

not subject to de novo review as are proposed findings and recommendations for dispositive

motions under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). 

I have carefully considered Defendants' objections and conclude they do not provide a

basis to modify the Magistrate Judge's Order. 

CONCLUSION

The Court AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Papak's Order [113].

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this day of , 2016.

 

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ

United States District Judge

2 - ORDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

JOHN BLAIR, 

Plaintiff, 

3:14-CV-01150-AC 

vs. 

CAROLYN COL VIN, 

Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

Based upon the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees in the 

amount of$2,182.72 shall be awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 

U.S.C. § 2412. The parties agree that attorney fees will be paid to Plaintiffs attorney, dependent 

upon verification that Plaintiff has no debt which qualifies for offset against the awarded fees, 

pursuant to the Treasury Offset Program as discussed inAstrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). 

If Plaintiff has no such debt, then the check shall be made out to Plaintiffs attorney and 

mailed to Plaintiffs attorney's office as follows: Merrill Schneider, P.O. Box 14490, Portland, 

OR 97293. If Plaintiff has a debt, then the check for any remaining funds after offset of the debt 

John costa 

United !ates Brstr'.~t 6/ttrt Judge 

f'i\.~is m:1e 

Case 3:14-cv-01150-AC Document 26 Filed 08/04/15 Page 1 of 1
Motion for Rehearing Granted, Memorandum Opinion filed June 19, 2012, 

Withdrawn, Appeal Reinstated, and Order filed August 23, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00783-CV

____________

JASON FELT, CANARY FINANCIAL, INC., JONATHAN WASSSERBERG, 

AND WASSERBERG INVESTMENTS, Appellants

V.

COMERICA BANK, Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2009-50665

ORDER

On June 19, 2012, this court issued an opinion dismissing this appeal. On June 21, 

2012, appellants filed a motion for rehearing. Appellee filed a response. The motion is 

GRANTED. 

This court’s opinion filed June 19, 2012, is WITHDRAWN, and our judgment of 

that date is VACATED. The appeal is ordered REINSTATED. 

Appellants' brief is due thirty days from the date of this order.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justices Hedge and Justices Seymore and Brown.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50215

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

THURMAN D. PAYNE,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-01-CR-899-3-DB

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Thurman D. Payne, federal prisoner # 16992-180, appeals the

district court’s denial of his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b)(3) motion

seeking relief from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence. 

Because Payne waived his right to indictment by grand jury, the

record does not support Payne’s allegations of fraud. See United

States v. Cothran, 302 F.3d 279, 283 (5th Cir. 2002). The

district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Payne’s

motion. See Seven Elves v. Eskenazi, 635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir.

1981). Accordingly, the district court’s order is AFFIRMED. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 17, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk