alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.13


 


	
  Logo Sprung

  	
  Innovation  |  versatility  | 
  reliability

  



 


AMENDMENT
#1 TO

LEASE AGREEMENT DATED MAY 30, 2002


 


	
  DATE.

  	
  June 10,
  2009

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  BETWEEN:

  	
  DRY
  CREEK RANCHERIA BAND OF POMO INDIANS

  c/O RIVER ROCK CASINO

  3250 Highway 128 East

  Geyservillle, California 95441

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  (Lessee)

  
	
   

  	
  and

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  SPRUNG
  INSTANT STRUCTURE4 INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  (Lessor)

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  SITE
  LOCATION:

  	
  Geyserville,
  California

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  STRUCTURE
  SIZE:

  	
  60’ x
  310’ and 130’ x 330’.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  AMENDMENT:

  	
  It is
  hereby agreed that the LEASE AGREEMENT dated May 30, 2002 is extended
  for an additional thirty-six months firm, for the period June 18, 2009
  through June 17, 2012, with Lessee’s monthly payments of $26,395.00 to
  be paid monthly in advance.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  COUNTERPARTS.

  	
  This
  Agreement may be executed by the parties in separate counterparts via
  facsimile, each of which shall be deemed an original and both of which
  together shall be deemed to be one and the same Instrument

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  EXISTING

  	
   

  
	
  AGREEMENTS:

  	
  All
  other terms of the LEASE AGREEMENT dated May 20,2002 and AMENDMENT TO
  LEASE AGREEMENT dated remain the same.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  ACCEPTED
  BY:

  	
  DRY
  GREEK RANCHERIA BAND 

  	
  SPRUNG
  INSTANT STRUCTURES INC.

  
	
   

  	
  OF
  POMO INDIANS

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Per:

  	
  /s/
  Joseph R. Callahan

  	
   

  	
  //s//

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Print
  Name:

  	
  Joseph
  R. Callahan

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Chief
  Financial Officer

  	
   

  	
  Per:

  	
  //s//

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Dated:

  	
  6/12/2009

  	
   

  	
  Dated:

  	
  6/16/2009

  



 


SPRUNG
INSTANT STRUCTURES, INC.


 


550,
16th Street, Suite #25   San
Francisco, California 94103   Tel (415)
934.9370  Fax (415) 935.9373  Toll Free: 
1 800 526.9899   www.sprung.com
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Corey S. Goodman, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(i) the Annual Report of Renovis, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods covered by the Annual Report.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set his hands hereto as of the 14thday of March, 2007.



By:

/s/    Corey S. GoodmanName: Corey S. GoodmanTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer


Dated: March 14, 2007

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates to, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by references into any filings of Renovis, Inc. under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,448
<SECURITIES>                                    29,932
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,894
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,525
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,706
<PP&E>                                          24,485
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,376
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  78,268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,884
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           119
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,697
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    78,268
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,090
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,216
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,965
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   210
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,306)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,506)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.23)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>















                                EXHIBIT 3.03
                               --------------



                  ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT OF MARCH 19, 1999
                             DATED MAY 11, 1999





                                    207
</Page>
<PAGE>

                ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT DATED MARCH 19, 1999.
               ---------------------------------------------


                     Dated this 11th day of May, 1999.


BETWEEN:


                    PROMAX ENERGY INC. (the "Purchaser")

                                   -and-

                   STARROCK RESOURCES LTD. (the "Vendor")



The above agreement is hereby amended to read that the effective date of
the transfer of the Tangibles is May 1, 1999.



                                     STARROCK RESOURCES LTD.
                                     ____________________________

                                     PROMAX ENERGY INC.
                                     _____________________________

                                     _____________________________

                                    208
</Page>
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Coast GuardU.S. Department of Homeland Security

Search
Search

Search

-  Home    -  News Room             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Forcecom             
  -  Operations             
  -  Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  History 
-  Units    -  Organization             
  -  Coast Guard A to Z             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  Force Readiness Command 
-  Leadership    -  Commandant’s Initiatives             
  -  Senior Leadership             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Operations             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area Commander             
  -  Pacific Area Commander             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Auxiliary 
-  Resources    -  CG Support             
  -  Legal      -  JoinCGJAG             
    -  Legal_Assistance        -  Find-A-Legal-Assistance-Lawyer             
      -  FAQ 
  -  Civil Rights             
  -  Work-Life             
  -  Administrative Law Judges      -  Virtual Hearing 
  -  Newsroom             
  -  Family             
  -  Library             
  -  CG Web Mail             
  -  Return 2 Service      -  FAQ 
-  Community    -  Art Program             
  -  Girl Scouts / Boy Scouts      -  Eagle Scout Recognition 
  -  Coast Guard Band             
  -  Coast Guard Cities             
  -  Honor Guard             
  -  JROTC      -  NEWS 
  -  Special Programs      -  Industry Academy        -  Contacts             
      -  2018 
  -  Trademark             
  -  Resources      -  History             
    -  CGC Eagle 
-  Mariners    -  National Vessel Documentation Center             
  -  National Maritime Center             
  -  National Pollution Funds Center      -  NRD        -  NRD_FAQs             
      -  Trustee_Links             
      -  NRD_DOCS             
      -  About_NRD_Funding 
  -  Boating Safety 
-  doing business		 
-  Join		 
-  Recruiting		 
-  contact		 
-  About		 

HomeHomeUnitsUnit Display
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1

                   AWARENESS LETTER OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                   -------------------------------------------

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

                                                    Re: OYO Geospace Corporation
                                                        Registration on Form S-8

We are aware that our report dated January 24, 2001, on our review of interim
financial information of OYO Geospace Corporation as of December 31, 2000 and
for the three months ended December 31, 2000 and 1999, and included in the
Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2000
is incorporated by reference in the Company's registration statement on Form S-8
(Nos. 333-40893 and 333-80003). Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act
of 1933, this report should not be considered a part of the registration
statement prepared or certified by us within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of
that Act.



                                                  /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
February 6, 2001

                                      15
#### SWIFT, Appellant, v. SWIFT, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.

May 26, 1894.)

Action by Margaret A. Swift against Charles H. Swift.

Argued before MAYHAM, JJ., and PUTNAM and HERRICK, JJ.

No opinion. Judgment and conviction upon which it is founded, so far as it awards costs, reversed, and set aside, with $10 costs of appeal and printing disbursements.
ANTIFOULING SYSTEMS

Written By Unknown Author

According to the CG-CVC Policy Letter #12-08 dated 15 October 

2012, the International Convention on the Control of Harmful AntiFouling Systems on Ships (AFS Convention) was adopted by the 

International Maritime Organization “to prohibit the use of harmful 

organotins in anti-fouling paints used on ships and to establish a 

mechanism to prevent the potential future use of other harmful 

substances in anti-fouling systems.

“Starting on November 21, 2012, U.S flagged vessels, wherever 

located, and foreign flagged vessels in the internal waters of the 

United States, in any port, shipyard, offshore terminal, or other 

place in the United States, must comply with the applicable portions 

of the AFS Convention” as outlined in the Policy Letter document.

The Policy Letter goes on to say, “[f]or applicable U.S. vessels, the 

Coast Guard or Recognized Classification Society (RCS), will verify 

compliance with the provisions of the AFS Convention and issue 

[International Anti-fouling Systems] IAFS Certificates and...[Record 

of Anti-fouling Systems]...ROAFS during routine scheduled 

inspections...

The Policy Letter is guidance and is not intended as a substitute for 

applicable legal requirements. The Letter suggests that in egregious 

cases of non-compliance with the AFS Convention, the Captain of the 

Port may wish to pursue a civil penalty against the offending vessel.
Exhibit 99.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
   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 Dynamic Ventures, Inc. (the "Company")
on  Form  10-KSB  for  the  period  ended  December  31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eric
Boehnke,  Principal  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 Sections 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.

Date:  March 19, 2003

                                               /s/ Eric Boehnke
                                             ------------------------
                                                   Eric Boehnke
                                             Chief Executive Officer


                                      -1-
<PAGE>
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 Quarterly Report of Smith Barney Potomac Futures Fund L.P. (the ‘‘Partnership’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jerry Pascucci, President and Director of Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Partnership.

/s/ Jerry Pascucci

Jerry Pascucci
Citigroup Managed Futures LLC
President and Director

Date: November 14, 2007

---
#### Robert M’Dermott *ads.*the State, Robert Butler, Prosecutor.

Upon the quashing of an attachment, for not obeying an award, the attorney of the defendant is entitled to the same costs as in other civil cases.

A writ of attachment for not obeying an award, had been quashed by this court at the term of September 1827. The *75attorney for M’Dermott made out his bill of costs, and inserted therein the same charges as are allowed in the Supreme Court, in all civil cases, by statute regulating fees. To this bill of costs, the counsel for Butler objected, and insisted that the defendant was not entitled to any costs.

The Court directed the clerk to retax the bill, and to allow the following items:

*Attorney. Court. Clerh*

Motion for rule to quash writ............ $2 05 00 00

Court and clerk’s fee on argument and rule....................................... ,00 $1 34 28

Clerk reading writ and return........... 00 00 28

Breviat, and copy, and counsel fee...... 3 68 00 00

Drawing costs and copy,taxing and filing 54 00 58

*Green,*for defendant.

*Vanarsdalen,*for plaintiff.
#### Brady *v.*James McDonnell Co.

Atpeal from Mobile Circuit Court.

Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson.

Francis J. Inge and John E. Mitchell, for appellant.

Fielding Vaughan, for appellee.

*651Opinion by

Dowdell, J.

*650Judgment was rendered by the circuit court of Mobile county against the appellant on his answer as garnishee, and from this judgment the present appeal is taken. The appellee, James McDonnell Company, as a creditor of the Hollinger Manufacturing Company, sued out an attachment against the latter, which was executed in part by writ of garnishment served on appellant Brady as a debtor of said Hollinger Manufacturing Company. The garnishee answered in -writing, and, also, orally upon the demand of the plaintiff. The answer of garnishee denied the indebtedness, and, also, disclosed the following facts: That he was a stockholder in the Hollinger Manufacturing Company, a corporation, and was its secretary and treasurer and the bookkeeper of the concern; that shortly before the attachment was sued ofit, he was paid by the defendant corporation $520 on his salary, it being at the time indebted to him on his salary account, something over a thousand dollars. At the time of this payment, the defendant corporation was insolvent, being indebted to a number of creditors, including the plaintiff in attachment. The *bona fides*of the indebtedness of the defendant corporation to *651Brady is not questioned. The sole question being as to the right of an insolvent corporation to prefer one of its officers, who is also a stockholder, being a creditor of the company, over its other creditors.

This question has been determined in the affirmative by this court in the case of *Corey v.*Wadsworth, 118 Ala. 488.

Under the authority of that case, the judgment against the garnishee is reversed and the cause remanded.
EXHIBIT 13.2
                                  CERTIFICATION
                                       of
                            Periodic Financial Report
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
                                  Section 1350

I, Cameron Richardson, Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer
of Aurora Metals (BVI) Limited, hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form
20-F for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Aurora Metals (BVI) Limited


June 1, 2004.                     By: (s)Cameron Richardson
                                  -------------------------
                                  Cameron Richardson Chief Financial Officer and
                                  Director.


This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other
purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Annual Report or as a separate
disclosure document.


<PAGE>
exv10w50









    Exhibit 10.50



 




    2000
    STOCK OPTION PLAN – AMENDMENT NO. 4



 



    The 2000 Stock Option Plan of Arinco Computer Systems Inc., as
    amended (the “Plan”), is hereby further amended
    as follows:



 


			
	 	    1.     
	
    Section 5(a) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety
    to read as follows:




 



    “Subject to Section 9, the aggregate number of shares
    of Stock in respect of which Options may be granted under the
    Plan is 8,000,000;”



 


			
	 	    2.     
	
    The last sentence of Section 3 of the Plan is hereby
    amended in its entirety to read as follows:




 



    “The expiration date of the Plan, on and after which no
    Options may be granted hereunder, shall be March 28, 2015;
    PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that no Incentive Stock Options shall be
    granted after March 28, 2010. The administration of the
    Plan shall continue in effect until all matters relating to the
    payment of Options previously granted have been settled.”



 


			
	 	    3.     
	
    The name of the Plan is hereby changed from the “Arinco
    Computer Systems Inc. 2000 Stock Option Plan” to the
    “Neurologix, Inc. 2000 Stock Option Plan.”
    Furthermore, Section 2(g) is hereby amended as follows:




 



    “Company” means Neurologix, Inc.”



 


			
	 	    4.     
	
    Except for the foregoing amendments set forth in
    paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above, all of the terms and
    conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.
#### Juan Carlos Ayala SANCHEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry SCRIBNER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 08-17044.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted April 12, 2011.

Filed April 21, 2011.

Timothy Edward Warriner, Attorney at Law, Sacramento, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Brian R. Means, Deputy Attorney General, United States Department of Justice, Brian G. Smiley, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for RespondenL-Appellee.

Before: FERNANDEZ and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and WELLS, Senior District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable Lesley Wells, Senior U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Juan Carlos Ayala-Sanchez (Sanchez) challenges the district court’s dismissal of his federal habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. Citing *In re Wessley W.,*125 Cal.App.3d 240, 181 Cal.Rptr. 401 (1981), as *modified, In re Swain,*34 Cal.2d 300, 209 P.2d 793 (1949), and *People v. Duvall,*9 Cal.4th 464, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 259, 886 P.2d 1252 (1995), the California Supreme Court denied Sanchez’s state habeas petition as procedurally deficient. After independently reviewing Sanchez’s state petition, we conclude that the petition was procedurally deficient under California law, as Sanchez failed to allege his claims with the requisite particularity, failed to attach reasonably available documents, and failed to adequately allege that he was in custody. *See In re Swain,*34 Cal.2d at 304, 209 P.2d 793; *Duvall,*9 Cal.4th at 474, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 259, 886 P.2d 1252; *In re Wessley W.,*125 Cal. App.3d 240, 181 Cal.Rptr. at 403-04.

Because Sanchez’s state habeas petition was procedurally deficient, the district court properly dismissed Sanchez’s federal habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. *See Harris v. Superior Ct.,*500 F.2d 1124, 1128 (9th Cir.1974) (en banc) (“If the denial of the habeas corpus petition includes a citation of an authority *743which indicates that the petition was procedurally deficient ... then the available state remedies have not been exhausted ...”) (citations omitted); *see also Gaston v. Palmer,*417 F.3d 1030, 1039 (9th Cir. 2005), *modified on other grounds,*447 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir.2006) (“In light of its citations to *Swain*and *Duvall,*we read the California Supreme Court’s denial of [the petitioner’s] ... habeas application as, in effect, the grant of a demurrer, i.e., a holding that [the petitioner] had not pled facts with sufficient particularity.”).1

Dismissal of Sanchez’s petition is not precluded by *Coleman v. Thompson,*501 U.S. 722, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). *Coleman*applies to procedural default rather than procedural deficiency. *See id.*at 731-32, 111 S.Ct. 2546.

AFFIRMED.

**

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

1

. Sanchez concedes that his claim for ineffective assistance of counsel was properly dismissed.