alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 7:07-cv-05815-KMK-MDF Document 12-11 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG     Document 52      Filed 03/07/2008     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG     Document 52      Filed 03/07/2008     Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 10.46**

THIRD AMENDMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

WHEREAS, Phillip L. Spector (the “Executive”) hasentered into an employment agreement with Intelsat, Ltd (the “Company”) and Intelsat Holdings, Ltd., dated as of January 31, 2005, as amended June 21, 2005 and March 8, 2006 (the “Employment Agreement”);

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the partieshereto do hereby agree to amend the Employment Agreement, effective as of March 16, 2007, as follows (the “Amendment”): 

1.        Capitalized Terms.    Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement. 

2.        Base Salary.    The Employment Agreement is amended to add the following twosentences to the end of section 2.1(a): “Effective as of February 19, 2007, Base Salary shall be increased to be $490,000. Increases to the Base Salary, as approved by the Compensation Committee from time to time, shall not require writtenamendment of this Agreement, and the increased Base Salary, once effective, shall be the Base Salary for purposes of this Agreement.” 

3.        Governing Law.    This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the District of Columbia without regard to its conflict of lawsprinciples. 

4.        Successor.    This Amendment shall bind and inureto the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns, and the Executive and his or her personal representatives and assigns. 

5.        Miscellaneous. 

(a)  This Amendment shall notbe construed so as to grant the Executive any right to remain in the employ of the Company or any Subsidiary. 

(b)  This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, which together shall constitute one and the same original. 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be duly executed by its officer thereunder duly authorized and the Executive has hereunto set his hand, all as of the day and year first set forth above. 

INTELSAT HOLDINGS, LTD.
EXHIBIT 99.1

# NEWS RELEASE

---

|CONTACT:                |  |                               | 
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------- | 
|Sam Reinkensmeyer       |  | Shawn Brumbaugh/Marian Briggs | 
|Chief Financial Officer |  | Padilla Speer Beardsley Inc.  | 
|CNS, Inc.               |  | (612) 455-1700                | 
|(952) 229-1500          |  | sbrumbaugh@psbpr.com          | 
|sreinkensmeyer@cns.com  |  | mbriggs@psbpr.com             | 
|Nasdaq: CNXS            | 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

# CNS, INC. DECLARES QUARTERLY DIVIDEND

MINNEAPOLIS, January 19, 2005
 CNS, Inc. (Nasdaq: CNXS), the Breathe Right® company, today announced that its board of directors has
declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.05 per share of common stock. The dividend is payable on March 4, 2005, to shareholders
of record as of February 18, 2005. The company has approximately 14.0 million shares outstanding.

About CNS, Inc.
 CNS, based in Minneapolis, designs and markets consumer health care products, including Breathe Right® nasal
strips, Breathe Right Snore Relief throat spray, Breathe Right Vapor Shot! personal vaporizer and
FiberChoice® chewable fiber tablets. The company focuses on better breathing and digestive health products that
address important consumer needs within the aging well/self care market. Its common stock is listed on the Nasdaq National Market
under the ticker symbol CNXS. More information about CNS and its products is available at www.cns.com.

###

---
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, Ian B. Carter, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this amendment no. 1 to annual report on Form 10-K/A ofCommonwealth Energy Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely
 

 

   affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Date: March 16, 2004 /s/ IAN B. CARTER      Ian B. Carter
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-05731-JGK-RLE Document 10 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 13 of 13
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 97 (Friday, May 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27711-27712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12542]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-44304; File No. 4-444]


Roundtable on Portals

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission

ACTION: Notice of roundtable meeting.

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

SUMMARY: On May 23, 2001, the Securities and Exchange Commission will 
host a roundtable to discuss issues related to relationships between 
Internet websites and financial service providers. Invitees include a 
cross section of individuals, including representatives from the 
financial industry, representatives of the Internet community, 
regulators, and academics.
    The roundtable will take place at the Commission's William O. 
Douglas Room, Room 1C30, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC, from 1 
p.m. to

[[Page 27712]]

4:30 p.m. The public is invited to observe the roundtable discussions. 
Seating is available on a first-come first-serve basis. The schedule, 
agenda, and list of panelists for the roundtable will be posted on the 
Commission's Internet website (http://www.sec.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Bussey or Christine Richardson, 
Office of the Chairman, at (202) 942-0100.

    Dated: May 14, 2001.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-12542 Filed 5-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
Delaware

The First State

Page 1

 

7316715 8100 Authentication: 202787489

SR# 20230689078 Date: 02-25-23

You may verify this certificate online at corp.delaware.gov/authver.shtml

I, JEFFREY W. BULLOCK, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF

DELAWARE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT

COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION OF “ELECTRON EXCHANGE DCM,

LLC”, FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON THE TWENTY-FOURTH DAY OF

FEBRUARY, A.D. 2023, AT 2:29 O`CLOCK P.M.
October 19, 2006
Via E-Mail

Office of the Acting Secretary
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Centre
1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: Rule Certification. NYMEX Submission 06.123: Notification =
of a Compliance Advisory Regarding the Disruptive Use of
TAS and MO Trading Practices.

Dear Ms. Eileen Donovan:

The New York Mercantile Exchange ("NYMEX" or the "Exchange") is notifying the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission’”) of a Compliance
Advisory regarding the disruptive use of trading at settlement (TAS) and matched orders (MOs).

The Compliance Advisory (attached Notice No. 06-548) reminds members that misuse of
TAS or MO trades to acquire a position in order to unfairly effect or attempt to unfairly effect a
settlement price subject the member and/or the customer to disciplinary action for any of a
number of rule violations including but not limited to attempted price manipulation, disruptive
trading, wash trading, or conduct substantially detrimental to the exchange.

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”) and CFTC Rule 40.6,
the Exchange hereby certifies that the attached notification filing complies with the Act,
including regulations under the Act.

If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Minett, Vice President, Compliance, at
(212) 299-2940, Russell Cloughen, Senior Director, Trade Practice Surveillance, at (212) 299-
2880, or Adam Wernow, Compliance Counsel, at (212) 299-2851.

Sincerely,

Thomas F. LaSala
Senior Vice President
Compliance and Risk Management

ce: Brian Regan


Notice No. 06-548
October 19, 2006

TO: All Exchange Members, Member Firms and Clearing Members
FROM: James E. Newsome, President
RE: Compliance Advisory: Disruptive Use of TAS and MO Trading Practices

Members are reminded that misuse of TAS or MO trades to acquire a position in order to
unfairly effect or attempt to unfairly effect a settlement price subject the member and/or the
customer to disciplinary action for any of a number of rule violations including but not limited to
attempted price manipulation, disruptive trading, wash trading, or conduct substantially
detrimental to the exchange. Investigation of suspected manipulative pricing involving TAS will
focus on the percentage of TAS positions acquired by a trader, group or traders or customer(s)
and whether the offset of that position during the close was disruptive, collusive, and/or caused
or attempted to cause aberrant price movement in the close.

If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Minett, Vice President, Compliance, at
(212) 299-2940, Russell Cloughen, Senior Director, Trade Practice Surveillance, at (212) 299-
2880, or Adam Wernow, Compliance Counsel, at (212) 299-2851.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSIONWashington, D.C. 20549

# FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORTPursuant
to Section 13 or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of
earliest event reported): May 20, 2004

DTLL, Inc.(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Minnesota
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)

|                         | 
|------------------------ | 
|0-30608                  | 
|(Commission File Number) | 

701 Xenia Avenue S.
Suite 130Golden Valley, Minnesota 55416(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)

(763) 923 2266(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

Not Applicable(Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)



---

Item 5.        Other Events

On
May 20, 2004, the Registrant issued a press release announcing that it signed a letter of
intent with Apollo Diamond, Inc., and Apollo Nano-Diamond Corporation to enter into a
Cooperative Technology Agreement. The full text of the press release is set forth in
Exhibit 99 attached hereto and incorporated in this Report as if fully set forth herein.

Item 7.        Financial Statements and
Exhibits

Exhibit
99        Press release dated May 20, 2004.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

|                    | DTLL, INC.                                                                                                              
|------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:  May 20, 2004 | By: /s/ Russell G. Felten                                                                                               
|                    | Russell G. Felten
                                                                               Chief Executive Officer



---

EXHIBIT INDEX

DTLL, Inc.Form 8-K
Current ReportDated May 20, 2004

|Exhibit Number | Description
|-------------- | -----------
|              
|99             |
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A1 82 5 . THE STATE v . DARI TY.

Up o n co n s i d erat i o n of A PPELLANT’ S m o t i o n t o d i s m is s i ts ap p eal i n t h e ab o ve-s ty l ed cas e, t h e s am e i s h ereb y GRANTED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## 07/13/2016 July 13, 2016
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________ NO. 09-14-00106-CR

________________ IN RE BYRON LYNN LUCAS

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ Original Proceeding

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Byron Lynn Lucas filed a writ of mandamus, in which he complains that the cumulation orders contained in judgments signed in 1999 are void because the cases were prosecuted in a single crim inal action. In two previous mandamus proceedings filed by Lucas concerning the sa me issue, this Court concluded that (1) the record did not support Lucas’s cl aim that the State prosecuted all of the cases in a single criminal action, (2) artic le 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides the exclusive post-appe llate vehicle for challenging a final felony conviction, and (3) Lu cas failed to demonstrate that he could not have challenged the cumulation orders through direct appeal or habeas corpus. See In re
Lucas , No. 09-09-00567-CV, 2010 WL 183872, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Jan.2 21, 2010, orig. pro ceeding) (mem. op.); In re Lucas , No. 09-07-157 CV, 2007 WL 1087134, at *1 (Tex. App.—B eaumont Apr. 12, 2007, or ig. proceeding) (mem. op.). We may grant mandamus relief only if th e relator demonstrates that (1) the act sought to be compelled is purely minist erial, and (2) the relator has no other adequate legal remedy. See State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Dist. , 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 200 1). Lucas has not shown that he is entitled to the relief sought. See id

. As previously discussed, we have a ddressed the same issue in two prior petitions for writ of mandamus filed by Lucas. Lucas , 2010 WL 183872, at *1;
Lucas , 2007 WL 1087134, at *1. Lucas raises no new issues or arguments in this proceeding, nor does he provide any additional documentati on to support his claims. We deny the petition for writ of ma ndamus. In addition, if Lucas should file additional mandamus proceedings raisi ng these claims, we will cite Lucas for abuse of the writ of mandamus unless he can demonstrate that his claim was not and could not have been prev iously raised, and that he has no adequate remedy at law and the act he seeks to compel is ministerial. See Ex parte Jones , 97 S.W.3d 586, 588-89 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (noting that frivolous filings waste scarce judicial and fiscal resources and citi ng the applicant for abuse of the writ).3 PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM
Opinion Delivered March 26, 2014 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kr eger and Horton, JJ.
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 Global Pharmatech, Inc. (the "Company"),
on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of
their knowledge:

     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.

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and will be furnished to the SEC or its staff
upon request.


Date: April 14, 2008                      /s/ Lianqin Qu
                                          -------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Lianqin Qu
                                   Title: Chairwoman, President and
                                          Chief Executive Officer

This Certification of the Chief Executive Officer is pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This exhibit is not "filed" for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 but is instead furnished as
provided by applicable rules of the Securities Exchange Commission.
1The Honorable Dean Whipple, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the

Western District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3293

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Western District of Missouri. 

Gary Dewayne Shipman, *

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: September 7, 2000

 Filed: September 14, 2000 

___________

Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gary DeWayne Shipman appeals from the final judgment entered in the district

court1 after he pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy charge. The district court sentenced

him to 121 months imprisonment and five years supervised release. For reversal, he

argues the suspended imposition of sentence (SIS) he received from a Missouri

municipal court in 1996 for driving under the influence was not a “prior sentence”

countable toward his criminal-history score. He also argues that the court erred in not
-2-

granting him a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5H1.4 based on his having

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS), and that the court violated Federal

Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(c)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) by failing to set forth

reasons for its decision. 

Having reviewed de novo the district court’s construction and interpretation of

Chapter Four of the Sentencing Guidelines, and reviewed for clear error its application

of Chapter Four to the facts, we conclude the court did not err in counting Shipman’s

SIS toward his criminal-history score. See United States v. Holland, 195 F.3d 415,

416-17 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of review; considering Missouri SIS conviction as

prior sentence under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(3) and assessing 1 criminal history point),

cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 1695 (2000); U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(c) (adding 1 point for each

prior sentence not otherwise counted), § 4A1.2(a)(3) (conviction for which imposition

or execution of sentence was initially suspended or stayed shall be counted as prior

sentence under § 4A1.1(c)), § 4A1.2(f) (“diversionary disposition” is counted if it

results from finding or admission of guilt).

Further, we find the district court exercised its discretion not to depart on the

basis of AIDS as an extraordinary physical impairment and we are thus without

jurisdiction to review this decision. See United States v. Saelee, 123 F.3d 1024, 1025

(8th Cir. 1997) (discretionary decision not to depart from the Guidelines is

unreviewable on appeal absent an unconstitutional motive). 

 

Finally, we reject Shipman’s Rule 32 challenge as legally inaccurate, see United

States v. Cureton, 89 F.3d 469, 474 (7th Cir. 1996) (Rule 32(c)(1) does not require

district court to enumerate its reasons for refusing to depart downward from Guidelines

range), and his section 3553 challenge as factually inaccurate, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)

(court shall state reasons for imposition of particular sentence).

Accordingly, we affirm.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gary Fields, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 1.)

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In view of the trial court’s full and proper initial charge to the jury and the additional instructions in response to the jurors’ request for a magnifying glass, the court did not err in denying defendant’s request for further instructions restating the jury’s right to scrutinize the evidence. Considering defendant’s extensive prior record, the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sentence. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Connell, J.— burglary, third degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Den-man, Green and Pine, JJ.