alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w6






Exhibit 10.6




AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO THE

SCIQUEST, INC.

SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED EXIT EVENT BONUS PLAN




     The SciQuest, Inc. Second Amended and Restated Bonus Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby
amended as of the Effective Date (as defined herein) as follows:



     1. Section 6.3(c) of the Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:




     (c) Automatic Termination of Plan Upon Passage of Time. As of October 28, 2010 (the
“Automatic Termination Date”), this Plan shall automatically terminate and no Participant
shall accrue any Bonus Benefit under this Plan after such date; provided, however, in the
event that the Automatic Termination Date occurs at a time that the Corporation either (i)
is a party to a duly executed and in effect term sheet for a Merger Event or (ii) has filed
a registration statement under the Securities Act with respect to a Public Offering, then
this Plan shall remain in effect for a period of ninety (90) days following the Automatic
Termination Date and shall automatically terminate on the ninety-first (91st) day
thereafter.



     2. Effective Date. The effective date of this Amendment is March 24, 2010 (the
“Effective Date”).



     3. Miscellaneous.



          (a) Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings given them in the
Plan.




          (b) Except as specifically amended hereby, the Plan shall otherwise remain in full force and
effect in accordance with its terms.




     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment No. 1 to the SciQuest, Inc. Second
Amended and Restated Exit Event Bonus Plan to be executed as of the Effective Date.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	SCIQUEST, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Stephen J. Wiehe
 	 
	 	 	Stephen J. Wiehe, Chief Executive Officer
#### Haynes *et al.,*Appellants, *v.*West *et al.,*Respondents.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, Fourth Department.*

May 2, 1890.)

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
# C_2021459EN.01000801.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 459/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 459/8

---

COMMUNITY PLANT VARIETY OFFICE

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2020

(2021/C 459/08)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://cpvo.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/cpvo_final_accounts_2020_da_mrl.pdf

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 74 (Monday, April 17, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20403-20404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9409]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[REG-116048-99]
RIN 1545-AX63

Stock Transfer Rules: Supplemental Rules; Hearing Cancellation

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public hearing on proposed 
rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides notice of cancellation of a public 
hearing on proposed regulations relating to supplemental rules for 
stock transfers.

DATES: The public hearing originally scheduled for Thursday, April 20, 
2000, at 10 a.m., is canceled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy Traynor of the Regulations Unit, 
Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate), (202) 622-7180 (not a toll-free 
number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed rulemaking and notice 
of

[[Page 20404]]

public hearing that appeared in the Federal Register on January 24, 
2000, (65 FR 3629), announced that a public hearing was scheduled for 
April 20, 2000 at 10 a.m., in room 2615, Internal Revenue Building, 
1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The subject of the public 
hearing is proposed regulations under section 367(b), of the Internal 
Revenue Code. The deadline for requests to speak and outlines of oral 
comments expired on March 31, 2000.
    The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing, 
instructed those interested in testifying at the public hearing to 
submit a request to speak and an outline of the topics to be addressed. 
As of April 11, 2000, no one has requested to speak. Therefore, the 
public hearing scheduled for April 20, 2000, is cancelled.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate).
[FR Doc. 00-9409 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lena Brown, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leahy, J.), rendered March 5, 1986, convicting her of robbery in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant initially contends that the People failed to prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We find this *464contention to be devoid of merit. The identification testimony was strong and any alleged inconsistencies were properly left to the Trial Judge for his resolution *(People v Gruttola,*43 NY2d 166, 122). Upon the exercise of our factual review power we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

We see no reversible error in the failure of the Trial Judge to state on the record and prior to summation the counts upon which he would render a verdict. Although he failed to comply with CPL 320.20 (5), the error was harmless. The purpose of this statutory requirement is to provide counsel with the opportunity to address in summation any lesser included offenses the court is inclined to consider *(see, People v Montgomery,*116 AD2d 669, 671). In this case the defendant was convicted of an offense charged in the indictment and not an uncharged lesser included offense. Accordingly, the error was harmless *(see, People v Pitello,*97 AD2d 801; *cf., People v Jones,*57 AD2d 905).

Finally, the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a mandatory surcharge upon the defendant in accordance with Penal Law § 60.35, as there had been no showing that the payment of the surcharge would work an unreasonable hardship on the defendant or her immediate family *(see,*CPL 420.35). If at the conclusion of her imprisonment, the defendant finds herself unable to pay the surcharge, she may move at that time for a waiver thereof *(see,*CPL 420.35, 420.10 [5]; *People v Williams,*121 AD2d 584, *lv denied*68 NY2d 774; *People v West,*124 Misc 2d 622). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
WRITTEN WARNING V. CIVIL PENALTY

Written by: Hearing Office Staff

Activity Summary Reports that reflect that a “Written Warning” was 

issued should generally not be sent to the Hearing Office for civil 

penalty action. Boarding Officers have the authority per 33 CFR 1.08 

to issue written warnings for certain violations. The reverse side of 

the Boarding Report, CG-4100, expressly states that if a written 

warning was issued then no civil penalty will be instituted. There is 

an exception to this general rule. 33 CFR 1.08-5 describes the 

exception. If the Activity Summary Report reflects a written 

warning” was issued and the processing official determines that civil 

penalty action is warranted, then the narrative should be annotated 

to reflect that the written warning has been rescinded, a prior 

written warning or violation issued within the described time period 

and, civil penalty action is being instituted as a result. Failure to do 

so may result in dismissal of the violations for which a written 

warning has been issued.
# C_2021309EN.01000601.xml

| 2.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10308 — Castik/Abry/RG)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 309/06)

On 14 July 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10308. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10308. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leon Williams, Appellant.

[946 NYS2d 921]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s motion to be relieved of assignment granted *(see People v Crawford, 71*AD2d 38 [1979]). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, M. William Boiler, J. — Assault, 1st Degree.) Present — Scudder, P.J., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Sconiers, JJ. (Filed June 8, 2012.)
Exhibit
        32.1
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
        SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the Annual Report of AMT Group, Inc., a Nevada corporation,
        (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2003, as filed with
        the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ms.
        Pak King Diu, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
        the
        following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
        906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:
 
 1.
              The
                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
                  15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
              The
                  information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
                  the
                  Company.
 
 /s/
                  Pak King DiuMs.
                  Pak King DiuPresident
                  and Chief Financial OfficerJanuary
                  24, 2008
#### Robert L. McNEAL, Petitioner-Appellant v. M. MARTIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 10-41213

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 4, 2011.

*323Robert L. McNeal, Beaumont, TX, pro se.

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Proceeding *pro se*and *informa pauper-is,*Robert L. McNeal, federal prisoner # 06212-089, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his 40-month sentence following a guilty-plea conviction for escape from a federal prison camp. McNeal contends: he is actually innocent of his career-offender sentence enhancement under Sentencing Guideline § 4B1.1 because his escape conviction is not a crime of violence in the light of *Chambers v. United States,*555 U.S. 122, 129 S.Ct. 687, 172 L.Ed.2d 484 (2009); and he is entitled to § 2241 relief under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). In an appeal from the denial of habeas relief, rulings on legal issues are reviewed *de novo;*findings of fact, for clear error. *Padilla v. United States,*416 F.3d 424, 425 (5th Cir.2005).

“Section 2255 provides the primary means of collaterally attacking a federal sentence” based upon alleged errors that occurred at, or prior to, sentencing. *Id.*at 425-26 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). McNeal’s § 2241 petition will be considered only if he establishes that § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. *Id.*at 426. McNeal bears the burden of establishing § 2255 as an inadequate or ineffective remedy. *See id.*This requires his showing: (1) his claim “is based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that the petitioner may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense”; and (2) his claim “was foreclosed by circuit law at the time when the claim should have been raised in the petitioner’s trial, appeal, or first § 2255 motion”. *Reyes-Requena v. United States,*243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.2001).

McNeal’s claim fails the first prong of the *Reyes-Requena*test because he can *not*establish that his conviction for escape from a federal prison camp was for a nonexistent offense. A claim of actual innocence of a career-offender *enhancement*is *not*a claim of actual innocence of the crime of conviction and, thus, *not*the type of claim warranting review under § 2241. *E.g., Kinder v. Purdy,*222 F.3d 209, 213-14 (5th Cir.2000); *see also Padilla,*416 F.3d at 427 (contrasting claims challenging sentencing and claims challenging conviction).

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
### NUMBER 13

- 19

- 00 3 85

- C R

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

ANTONIO TREVINO

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee.

On appeal from the 214th District Court

of Nueces C ounty, Texas.



### ORDER WITHDRAWING RECORD

Before Justices Benavides

, Hinojosa , and Silva

Order Per Curiam

The mandate in the above cause was issued on August 31, 2021. The Honorable

Jason Wolf has filed a motion to withdraw the record in the above

- referenced cause

.

Having considered the motion, the Court is of the opinion that the request should be

granted. Accordingly, the motion is hereby grant ed with ord er

.2

The record, consisting of the clerk’s and reporter’s record, is ordered to be

withdrawn and made available to the Honorable Jason Wolf on this date; he shall arrange

for deliver y of the record s, at his expense, with the Clerk of the Court within five (5) days.

Furthermore, the Honorable Jason Wolf is hereby ORDERED to return the record

to this Court on or before January 3, 2022 , or, if he is unable to return the record at that

time, to seek an ext ension by filing a motion with the Court.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the

29t h day of N o vember , 202 1

.
----

**Exhibit 32.1**

**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 Garuda Capital Corp. (the “Company”)  on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, C.  Robin Relph, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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: 

| 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. |

By:

/s/ C. Robin Relph                 C. Robin Relph,  Chief Executive Officer and  Chief Financial Officer

December 9, 2005

----
EXHIBIT 11.0


                               SAVILLE SYSTEMS PLC
                                FORM 10-Q REPORT
                FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997


                    Calculation of Shares Used in Determining
                            Net Income Per Share (1)

(unaudited)
(in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>

                                                         Three months ended        Nine months ended
                                                        Sept.30      Sept.30      Sept.30      Sept.30
                                                         1997         1996         1997         1996
<S>                                                     <C>           <C>          <C>         <C>   


Net income ........................................     $ 6,284      $ 3,311      $16,127      $ 7,915

Weighted average share and share equivalents:
     Ordinary shares ..............................      36,965       35,542       36,541       35,293
     Non-qualified share options ..................       2,632        2,554        2,552        2,457


                                                         39,597       38,096       39,093       37,750


Net Income per share (2) ..........................     $  0.16      $  0.09      $  0.41      $  0.21

</TABLE>





     (1) This Exhibit  should be read in connection  with "Net Income per share"
     in Note 3 of the notes to the consolidated interim financial statements.

     (2) The  calculation  of fully diluted  earnings per share is equivalent to
     the primary earnings per share for the periods presented.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- Analex Corporation Under Contract No. NAS 10-02026 et al. APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 58419

Jerome S. Gabig, Jr., Esq.

Wilmer & Lee, P.A. Huntsville, AL E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq.

DCMA ChiefTrial Attorney Robert L. Duecaster, Esq.

Trial Attorney Defense ContractManagement Agency Manassas, VA ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed withprejudice. Dated: 6 March 2014

Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 58419, Appeal ofAnalex Corporation, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 20826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9584]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Advisory Council; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following 
National Advisory body scheduled to meet during the month of May 2000.

    Name: HRSA AIDS Advisory Committee (HAAC).
    Date and Time: May 17, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.; May 18, 2000; 
8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
    Place: Doubletree Park Terrace, 1515 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20005, Telephone: (202) 232-7000.
    The meeting is open to the public.
    Agenda: Agenda items for the meeting include reauthorization 
issues of the Ryan White CARE Act, program updates, policy paper 
presentations, and health services research/evaluation meeting 
update and discussion.
    Anyone requiring further information should contact Joan 
Holloway, HIV/AIDS Bureau, Parklawn Building, Room 7-13, 5600 
Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857, telephone (301) 443-5761.

    Dated: April 12, 2000.
Jane M. Harrison,
Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination.
[FR Doc. 00-9584 Filed 4-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF EAGLE USA AIRFREIGHT, INC. FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          47,403
<SECURITIES>                                    12,010
<RECEIVABLES>                                   86,149
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,425
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               149,985
<PP&E>                                          38,577
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,034
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 187,682
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,469
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            19
<OTHER-SE>                                     140,194
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   187,682
<SALES>                                        428,424
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               428,424
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  243,455
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               153,366
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,537
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,961
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,576
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07


</TABLE>