alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

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 March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jennifer Magro, Chief Financial Officer 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/ Jennifer Magro            

Jennifer MagroCitigroup Managed Futures LLC Chief Financial Officer and Director     

Date: May 14, 2007

----
Exhibit 10.3


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO NIRUP KRISHNAMURTHY EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT


 





THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
is made and entered into on June 14, 2021, by and between Nirup Krishnamurthy (“Employee”) and MEDICINE MAN TECHNOLOGIES,
INC. (“MMT”) DBA SCHWAZZE (each of the foregoing referred to individually as “Party” or collectively as the “Parties”).


 


W I T N E S S E T H:


 


WHEREAS, the Parties have previously entered
into the Employment Agreement on or about March 1, 2020;


 


1.       Section 3. of the Employment
Agreement titled “COMPENSATION,” subsection a., is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


“Employer agrees to pay to the Employee during
the Term of this Agreement, a base gross salary of $300,000 per annum (“Base Salary”), payable in equal installments on a
bi-weekly basis, due and payable on those days of the month where Employer customarily makes salary payments to its other employees. The
Employee shall be entitled to receive catch up payments on the first payroll date in each of June, 2021, July 2021, and August 2021 equal
to one third of any and all unpaid Base Salary for the months of January, 2021, February 2021, March 2021 and April 2021. Employer shall
be responsible for deduction from each salary payment tendered to Employee herein all applicable withholding and other employment taxes
imposed by state and federal tax regulations. The Employer may periodically increase Employee’s annual Base Salary at its sole discretion.”


 


2.       Section 3. of the Employment
Agreement titled “COMPENSATION,” subsection g., is hereby amended, in part, as follows:


 


Delete “until”;


 


3.        Section 3. of
the Employment Agreement titled “COMPENSATION” subsection h., is hereby added as follows:


 


On or about June 14, 2021, the Board
established a new 2021 Bonus Plan (the “Bonus Plan”), which applies to the Employee. Under the Bonus Plan, Employee may earn
a target cash bonus of up to 100% of their base salary adjusted or otherwise. The bonus plan is attached as Exhibit A to this First Amendment.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed
this First Amendment on the date set forth above.


 


	MEDICINE MAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.	
    Nirup Krishnamurthy

     

	By:	/s/ Justin Dye                          	By:	/s/ Nirup Krishnamurthy__________
	Name:	Justin Dye	Name:	Nirup Krishnamurthy
	Title:	Chief Executive Officer	Title:	Employee
	Address:	4880 Havana St. Suite 201, Denver CO 80239	 	 
	Email:	Justin@schwazze.com	 	 
	Phone:	(303) 371-0387	 	 


 


 


 


 


 


 






    	 	1	 



     


    

 


Exhibit A


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 






    	 	2
Public Engagement Division

Stakeholder Message

Progress on USCIS Processing Times

We have released a new fact sheet showing significant progress on reducing processing

times across a range of different forms.

What You Need to Know

The fact sheet includes newly published data showing that, for nearly all our highestvolume forms, median processing times are significantly lower in fiscal year 2024 to

date than in the previous fiscal year.

Notable median processing times include:

• Less than 30 days for employment authorization documents from asylum

applicants and from certain parolees;

• 5.2 months for naturalization, which is the lowest since 2016;

• 3.6 months for employment authorization documents from adjustment

applicants, which is the lowest since 2017;

• 4.4 months for advance parole documents, which is the lowest since 2018; and

• 2.7 months for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (nonpremium).

At the same time, we acknowledge that we need to make more progress to reduce

processing times for certain other forms. For example, processing times and net

backlogs remain higher than our processing goals for Form I-601, Application for

Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver; Form I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition;

and bona fide determinations related to Form I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant

Status. Fortunately, the HART Service Center is poised to make significant progress on

these forms, as described in new FAQs recently posted on the center’s first anniversary.

We are also making steady progress related to EB-5 immigrant investor forms by hiring 

new staff and making other important investments at our Immigrant Investor Program

Office, while strictly complying with Congress’ anti-fraud and integrity provisions. For 

more information, please see the newly updated EB-5 FAQs.

On April 1, 2024, we began using a final rule to adjust, for the first time since 2016,

certain immigration and naturalization benefit request fees. With this fee rule, we can

recover our operating costs more fully and support more timely processing of new

applications.

We have also updated our Check Case Processing Times resource to clarify the

difference between administrative processing times, which we are working hard to
Public Engagement Division

reduce, and delays due to statutory limitations, which only Congress can resolve. For 

example, certain processing times for Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, can appear 

very long, but this is because there are not enough available immigrant visas under the 

statutory caps established by the Immigration Act of 1990. We use the State 

Department’s visa bulletin to determine whether a visa is available before processing a 

Form I-130 preference petition.

For More Information. 

For a full list of processing times going back to FY 2013, please see our historical 

processing times page.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit uscis.gov or follow us on

X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
#### In the Matter of Albert Kemperle, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Robert J. Gunther et al., Respondents.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to set aside a condition imposed upon a variance, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), entered January 27, 1987, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In 1979, Albert Kemperle was the owner of a parcel of land zoned as an "R-l” residential district. He applied for, and was granted, a variance to maintain a parking lot for use only by his employees during the day. In 1984, the petitioner applied for a building permit to construct a roof over the parking area. This application was also granted and the construction commenced. On or about August 6, 1984, the permit was revoked and a stop-work order was issued on the ground that the construction was in violation of the terms of the 1979 variance. At a hearing, it was determined that the structure was approximately 85% completed and consisted of three walls which supported a roof. After the hearing, the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Valley Stream determined that the structure should be permitted to stand, with the condition that doors never be put on the structure so that it would not be fully enclosed. This condition was apparently imposed based upon the fear of neighboring residents that Kemperle would store volatile chemicals in the area, which he used in his business, which was situated on the parcel adjacent to the parking lot.

The petitioners now seek judicial review of the condition imposed upon the variance, arguing that such a condition is unreasonable based upon the intended use of the premises.

The petition was properly dismissed. Based upon this record, it appears that the petitioners are attempting to turn the variance, which allows them to maintain an employee parking *270lot, into one which would enable them to build a garage. Since the petitioners never applied for, and were never granted, such a variance, the condition which prevents them from fully enclosing the structure is not unreasonable. Mangano, J. P., Niehoff, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FROYLAN VARGAS HERNANDEZ, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 20-73514 

Agency No. A079-158-400 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 18, 2021**

Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Froylan Vargas Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for relief under the 

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JUN 1 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 20-73514 

§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Tamang 

v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because 

Vargas Hernandez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or 

with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See 

Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the 

mandate. The motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
exv10w1






Exhibit 10.1




EMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.




Compensation of Non-Employee Directors

November 12, 2009



Annual Retainer — $40,000, paid quarterly (40%, or $16,000, automatically paid in deferred stock
units under the Deferred Compensation Plan discussed below)



Additional Annual Retainer for Chairman of the Board — $100,000



Additional Annual Retainer for Chairman of the Audit Committee — $20,000



Additional Annual Retainer for Chairman of the Compensation Committee — $10,000



Additional Annual Retainer for Chairman of the Science & Technology Committee — $10,000



Board Meeting Fees — $2,500 for attendance in person, $1,000 for telephonic attendance; $1,000
for second day of a multi-day meeting



Committee Meeting Fees — $2,000 for attendance in person at a meeting occurring on a day other
than the day of either a Board meeting or another committee meeting for which a particular
director is compensated, or $500 for telephonic attendance (includes non-members if attending
at the invitation of the Committee Chair); $1,000 for second day of a multi-day meeting



Options — 15,000 shares upon initial election (vesting 3,000 per year), exercisable at market
price on date of grant


5,000 shares per year upon each re-election, vesting after 6 months and exercisable at market
price on date of grant


Once vested, all options remain exercisable for six years from grant



Phantom Stock Deferred Compensation Plan — Each director may elect to designate all or a portion
of his remaining cash compensation to purchase phantom EMS share units at current market
prices. Cash payout occurs following retirement as a director or, for voluntary deferrals,
after 5 years, subject to the director’s limited right to further defer. Payment is based on
market value of the common stock at the time paid, and is taxable income to the director only
at that time.



Umbrella Liability Insurance — $3 million personal liability coverage above normal limits under
personally-maintained household/auto policies



Travel Expenses — The Company reimburses travel expenses incurred in connection with activities as
a member of the Board and its Committees. An additional $1,000 each way is paid to any
director traveling to or from a home located more than two time zones from the meeting site.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leroy J. Mackie, Appellant.

sJudgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted by a jury verdict, after a second retrial, of four counts of rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35) and one count of sodomy in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.50). On defendant’s first appeal, we concluded that it was error to admit into evidence items seized during the warrantless search of defendant’s apartment by his parole officer and two police officers *(People v Mackie,*77 AD2d 778). On the second appeal, we ruled that the court should have suppressed a statement taken by the police and testimony pertaining to voice and lineup identifications based upon a violation of defendant’s right to counsel *(People v Mackie,*100 AD2d 739). On this appeal, defendant *515argues that based upon the illegal search and seizure and the illegal lineup, there was no probable cause to arrest him and, therefore, the indictment must fall. There is no merit to this claim.

Defendant cannot claim immunity from prosecution simply because his appearance in court was precipitated by an unlawful arrest *(United States v Crews,*445 US 463; *People v Young,*55 NY2d 419, 426, *cert denied*459 US 848). Defendant is not himself a suppressible "fruit” and the illegality of his detention cannot deprive the People of the opportunity to prove his guilt through the introduction of evidence wholly untainted by the police misconduct *(United States v Crews, supra,*at 474). The complainant’s presence in the courtroom at defendant’s trial was not the product of any police misconduct, nor did the propriety of defendant’s arrest infect the complainant’s ability to give accurate identification testimony. There is ample evidence in the record that the complainant’s identification of defendant as her assailant rested on her independent recollection of her encounter with defendant and thus, the court properly permitted the complainant to identify defendant at trial *(see, People v Jenkins,*132 AD2d 942; *People v Smith,*115 AD2d 304; *People v Washington,*111 AD2d 418, *lv denied*66 NY2d 768).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, the jury verdict was not against the weight of the evidence and was legally sufficient *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490).

We have reviewed the other claims raised on appeal and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Davis, J.—rape, first degree, and other offenses.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green and Balio, JJ.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.02

                    CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

      I, Theresa D. Becks, the Chief Financial Officer of Campbell & Company,
Inc. as managing operator, of The Campbell Fund Trust, certify that (i) the Form
10Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 of The Campbell Fund Trust fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10Q for the
quarter ended March 31, 2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of The Campbell Fund Trust.

                                THE CAMPBELL FUND TRUST
                                By: Campbell & Company, Inc., managing operator

                                By: /s/ Theresa D. Becks
                                    ---------------------------------
                                    Theresa D. Becks
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    May 14, 2004

                                       E 7
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        18150350
<SECURITIES>                                  12360088
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              30635660
<PP&E>                                           62192
<DEPRECIATION>                                   12684
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                30691216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3905868
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    5957290
<COMMON>                                        142545
<OTHER-SE>                                    20685513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  30691216
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3967376
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (778872)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (3188504)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (3188504)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (3188504)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.24)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,018
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      137
<ALLOWANCES>                                        15
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,287
<PP&E>                                              29
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,386
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              148
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,232
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,386
<SALES>                                            242
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   272
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,055
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (783)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (783)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (783)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.20)


</TABLE>
#### In re KINGS, Q. & S. R. CO. In the matter of the application of the Kings, Queens & Suffolk Railroad Company.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 13, 1896)

No opinion. Motion to resettle the order denied, without costs. See 39 N. Y. Supp. 1004.
Exhibit 32



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 on Form 10-Q of EGL, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.





Date:

November 9, 2006

By:

/s/ James R. Crane



James R. Crane

Chief Executive Officer





Date:

November 9, 2006

By:

/s/ Charles H. Leonard



Charles H. Leonard

Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EGL, Inc. and will be retained by EGL, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.