alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2 – DEFENDANT SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC.’S 

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

The Rosen Law Firm, P.C. 

1000 SW Broadway, Suite 1220 

Portland, Oregon 97205 

Phone: (503) 525-2525; Fax: (503) 525-2526 

Steven O. Rosen, OSB #785009 

Rosen@RosenLawFirm.com 

Elizabeth M. Ferrarini OSB #944859 

Ferrarini@RosenLawFirm.com 

The Rosen Law Firm, P.C. 

1000 SW Broadway, Suite 1220 

Portland, OR 97205 

Telephone: (503) 525-2525 

Facsimile: (503) 525-2526 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Spirit Airlines, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

TIMOTHY MEACHAM, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SPIRIT AIRLINES INC. and; KERRIE 

CONRAD,

 Defendants. 

Case No. 3:15-cv-00338-SI

DEFENDANT SPIRIT AIRLINES 

INC.’S CORPORATE 

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7.1, defendant Spirit Airlines, 

Inc. states that it has no parent corporations and that no publicly held corporation 

Case 3:15-cv-00338-SI Document 6 Filed 03/23/15 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 2 – DEFENDANT SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC.’S 

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

The Rosen Law Firm, P.C. 

1000 SW Broadway, Suite 1220 

Portland, Oregon 97205 

Phone: (503) 525-2525; Fax: (503) 525-2526 

owns ten percent (10%) or more of its stock. Defendant Spirit Airlines, Inc. further 

states that FMR LLC owns more than 10% of its stock; however, its understanding 

is that FMR LLC is not publicly held.

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2015. 

 s/ Steven O. Rosen 

 Steven O. Rosen, OSB # 785009 

Rosen@RosenLawFirm.com 

Of Attorneys for Defendant Spirit Airlines, Inc. 

Case 3:15-cv-00338-SI Document 6 Filed 03/23/15 Page 2 of 3
Page 1 - Certificate of Service The Rosen Law Firm, P.C. 

1000 SW Broadway, Suite 1220 

Portland, Oregon 97205 

Phone: (503) 525-2525; Fax: (503) 525-2526 

 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT 

SPIRIT AIRLINES, INC.’S CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by 

the following indicated method or methods: 

 by mailing full, true, and correct copies thereof in sealed, 

 first-class postage-prepaid envelopes, addressed to the 

 attorney(s) as shown below, the last-known address(es) of the 

attorney(s) and deposited with the United States Postal Service 

at Portland, Oregon on the date set forth below. 

 by causing full, true, and correct copies thereof to be 

hand-delivered via messenger to the attorney(s) at the last-known 

 address(es) listed below on the date set forth below. 

 Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to plaintiff’s counsel by operation 

 of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing 

 through the Court’s CM/ECF system. 

 

Mr. William Ball 

Attorney William Ball, LLC 

420 SW Washington, Suite 400 

Portland, OR 97204

Attorney for plaintiff Timothy Meacham 

 DATED this 23rd day of March, 2015. 

 

 s/ Steven O. Rosen 

Steven O. Rosen, OSB #785009 

Case 3:15-cv-00338-SI Document 6 Filed 03/23/15 Page 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 355 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 355

 Honoring the memory of Special Agent Jared Francom of the Ogden, Utah 
                           Police Department.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 26, 2012

Mr. Hatch (for himself and Mr. Lee) submitted the following resolution; 
                   which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Honoring the memory of Special Agent Jared Francom of the Ogden, Utah 
                           Police Department.

Whereas, on January 4, 2012, Special Agent Jared Francom of the Ogden, Utah 
        Police Department, serving on the Weber-Morgan Narcotics Strike Force, 
        was fatally wounded in a shooting while serving a search warrant on a 
        residence in Ogden;
Whereas Officers Michael Rounkles, Kasey Burrell, and Shawn Grogan of the Ogden 
        Police Department were also wounded in the shooting;
Whereas Sergeant Nate Hutchinson of the Weber County Sheriff's Office was also 
        wounded in the shooting;
Whereas Officer Jason Vanderwarf of the Roy Police Department was also wounded 
        in the shooting;
Whereas the officers on the Weber-Morgan Narcotics Task Force acted quickly and 
        bravely to subdue the shooting suspect, preventing further injury and 
        loss of life;
Whereas Officer Kasey Burrell remains in the hospital recovering from serious 
        injuries sustained in the shooting;
Whereas Special Agent Francom served with the Ogden Police Department for 8 
        years;
Whereas Special Agent Francom served the Ogden community with honor and 
        distinction;
Whereas the people of Utah have come together to mourn and honor Special Agent 
        Francom, with an estimated 4,000 people attending the funeral of Special 
        Agent Francom on January 11, 2012, in Ogden; and
Whereas the injury or loss of any police officer is a reminder of the risks 
        taken by all the men and women of law enforcement on behalf of their 
        communities: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) recognizes and honors the sacrifice of Special Agent 
        Jared Francom;
            (2) extends the deepest condolences of the Senate to the 
        family and friends of Special Agent Francom;
            (3) expresses the wishes of the Senate for a full and 
        speedy recovery of all the officers wounded in the shooting in 
        Ogden, Utah; and
            (4) recognizes the remarkable courage and honor that the 
        men and women in law enforcement display and the risks those 
        men and women take to keep their communities safe.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ramon Alberto RABAGO-FELIX, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-50451.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 20, 2011.

Adam Lome Braverman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Stewart Michael Young, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.

Anthony E. Colombo, Jr., Esquire, Law Offices of Anthony E. Colombo, Jr., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

*165Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ramon Alberto Rabago-Felix appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 120-month sentence for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rabago-Felix contends that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction because the evidence does not reflect that he knowingly possessed cocaine. After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the record reflects that “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” *United States v. Diaz-Cardenas,*351 F.3d 404, 407 (9th Cir.2003) (also noting that a jury can infer knowledge when an individual is the driver and sole occupant of a vehicle, or in possession of a large quantity of drugs).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
exv10w04






Exhibit 10.04




FIRST AMENDMENT TO RESIDENTIAL LEASE




     This First Amendment to Residential Lease (this “First Amendment”) is made and entered into as
of July 29, 2008, by and between 849 College Avenue, Inc. (“Landlord”) and Kevin Bushby and
Elizabeth Bushby (collectively, “Tenant”).



RECITALS:




     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant have entered into that certain Amended and Restated Residential
Lease dated as of February 21, 2007 (the “ Lease”); and



     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the Lease to modify the provisions thereof as
more particularly set forth herein.



     NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants and agreements
herein set forth, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, adequacy and
sufficiency of which are hereby expressly acknowledged by the parties hereto, the parties hereto
hereby covenant and agree as follows:



     1. Option(s) to Extend.



     (a) The words and figures “one (1)” set forth in the second line of Section 35(a) of the Lease
are hereby deleted in their entirety, and inserted in lieu thereof shall be the words and figures
“four (4)”.



     (b) A new clause (v) is hereby added at the end of Section 35(a) of the Lease, which clause
(v) reads as follows:




"(v) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Tenant may not exercise any Option if
Executive is not employed on a full time basis as an Executive Vice President of Cadence or
any of its successors at the time such Option would be exercisable.”



     (c) The parenthetical that follows the word “Cause” in the fourth line of Section 35(b) of the
Lease is hereby deleted in its entirety and inserted in lieu thereof shall be the following words:
"(as defined in Section 4.2 of Executive’s Employment Agreement, dated July 29, 2008)”.



     (d) The parenthetical that follows the words “Constructive Termination” in the sixth line of
Section 35(b) of the Lease is hereby deleted in its entirety and inserted in lieu thereof shall be
the following words: “(as defined in Section 4.3 of Executive’s Employment Agreement, dated July
29, 2008).”



-1-









 








     2. Ratification. The Lease, as modified by this First Amendment, is hereby ratified
and confirmed by Landlord and Tenant. Each of the parties hereto hereby confirms that the Lease,
except as expressly amended by this First Amendment, remains in full force and effect.



     3. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this First Amendment to be executed and
delivered as of the date first above written.


849 College Avenue, Inc.



	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ James J. Cowie
	 	/s/ Kevin Bushby
	 

	 	 
	 	 
	Name:

	 	James J. Cowie
	 	Kevin Bushby
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Title:

	 	Sr. Vice President & General	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Counsel
	 	/s/ Elizabeth Bushby
	 

	 	 
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Elizabeth Bushby







-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
 Commodity Protection and Quality Research: Parlier, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center
                                    Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research
                                    Water Management Research
                                    National Arid Land Plant Genetic RepositorySearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Parlier, California San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center Commodity Protection and Quality Research People & Locations







Tadeh  Issaian
                        Commodity Protection and Quality Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Technician(Biochemistry)
                        Phone: (530) 302-6116
                        
                        
                        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
October 31, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NJOKU KRISS, TIESHA HAMILTON AND/OR ALL OCCUPANTS, Appellants

NO. 14-13-00469-CV V.

WATERFALL PARKS APTS, Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on May 13, 2013. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellants, Njoku Kriss, Tiesha Hamilton and/or All Occupants, jointly and 

severally.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00463-CV 

LATRICIA SMITH AND ALL OTHER 

OCCUPANTS OF 4024 SOUTHERN 

CHARM COURT, ARLINGTON, TX 

76016

APPELLANT

V.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. APPELLEE 

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 2013-001982-1

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

On September 5, 2014, we notified appellant that her brief had not been 

filed as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). See Tex. R. 

App. P. 38.6(a). We stated we could dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution 

unless appellant or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

within ten days a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 42.3. We have not received any response.

Because appellant’s brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for 

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ. 

DELIVERED: October 9, 2014
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 1 of 20 PageID #:245
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 2 of 20 PageID #:246
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 3 of 20 PageID #:247
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 4 of 20 PageID #:248
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 5 of 20 PageID #:249
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 6 of 20 PageID #:250
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 7 of 20 PageID #:251
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 8 of 20 PageID #:252
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 9 of 20 PageID #:253
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 10 of 20 PageID #:254
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 11 of 20 PageID #:255
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 12 of 20 PageID #:256
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 13 of 20 PageID #:257
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 14 of 20 PageID #:258
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 15 of 20 PageID #:259
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 16 of 20 PageID #:260
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 17 of 20 PageID #:261
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 18 of 20 PageID #:262
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 19 of 20 PageID #:263
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 31 Filed: 07/30/04 Page 20 of 20 PageID #:264
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 15

- 00257

- CV In the INTEREST OF N.F.R. , a Child From the 57th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013

- PA

- 02004 Honorable Martha Tanner, Judge Presiding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Jason Pulliam, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 8, 2015
DIS MISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION This is an appeal in a case involving the termination of appellant’s parental rights. On February 9, 2015, Associate Judge Charles E. Montemayor signed an order terminating appellant’s parental rights. Appellant timely filed a request for a de novo heari ng before the referring court. The record reflects a de novo hearing was held before the referring court on April 20, 2015. However, the record does not contain an order or judgment signed by the referring court. When a de novo hearing has been held in the referring court, a signed order or judgment by the referring court is required to invoke the jurisdiction of this court. See T EX
. F AM
. C ODE A NN
. § 201.016 (b) (West 2014 )

.

1 Senior Judge, sitting by assignment04

- 15

- 00257

- CV

- 2

- We ordered appellant to either obtain a signed appealable order or judgment from the referring court or to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Counsel for appellant filed a response acknowledging that no final appealable order had been signed by the referring court and asserting this court lac ks jurisdiction over the appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                               
<ARTICLE>                                           5
                                                     
<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                        dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                                           0
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 0
<PP&E>                                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            0
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     0
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         2,527,269
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           478,695
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          41,969
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          2,006,605
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      2,006,605
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                             2,006,605
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.1





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


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





In connection with the annual report of Catalina Lighting, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K
for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert Varakian, President and 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:





(a)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





/s/    ROBERT
VARAKIANRobert Varakian President and
Chief Executive Officer





Date: December 20, 2002