alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
hlf-ex1031_442.htm



Exhibit 10.31

AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED 2005 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

Section 6(a) and Section 6(b) of the Plan shall read in their entirety as follows:

6. Shares Subject to the Plan and to Awards

(a) Aggregate Limits.  The aggregate number of Common Shares issuable pursuant to all Awards shall equal 7,300,000 plus (i) any Common Shares that were authorized for issuance under the Prior Plan that, as of the Effective Date, remain available for issuance under the Prior Plan (not including any Common Shares that are subject to, as of the Effective Date, outstanding awards under the Prior Plan or any Common Shares that prior to the Effective Date were issued pursuant to awards granted under the Prior Plan) and (ii) any Common Shares subject to awards granted under the Prior Plan that are terminated, expire unexercised, forfeited or settled in cash. Any Common Shares granted as Options or Stock Appreciation Rights shall be counted against this limit as one (1) share for every one (1) share granted. Any Common Shares granted as Awards other than Options or Stock Appreciation Rights shall be counted against this limit as two and six-tenths shares for every one (1) share granted. The aggregate number of Common Shares available for grant under this Plan, the number of Common Shares subject to outstanding Awards, and the number of Common Shares set forth in the proviso of the preceding sentence shall be subject to adjustment as provided in Section 12. The Common Shares issued pursuant to Awards granted under this Plan may be shares that are authorized and unissued or shares that were reacquired by the Company, including shares purchased in the open market.

(b) Issuance of Shares. Common Shares subject to an Award or to an award under the Prior Plan that are terminated, expire unexercised, forfeited or settled in cash shall be available for subsequent Awards under this Plan. Any Common Shares that again become available for grant pursuant to this Article 6 shall be added back as one (1) Common Share if such shares were subject to Options or Stock Appreciation Rights granted under the Plan or options or stock appreciation rights granted under the Prior Plan, and as two and six-tenths (2.6) Common Shares if such shares were subject to Awards other than Options or Stock Appreciation Rights granted under the Plan or subject to awards other than options or stock appreciation rights granted under the Prior Plan. Shares subject to Options or Stock Appreciation Rights that are exercised shall not be available for subsequent awards. The following transactions involving Common Shares will not result in additional Common Shares becoming available for subsequent Awards under this Plan: (i) Common Shares tendered or withheld in payment of an Option; (ii) Common Shares withheld or tendered for taxes; (iii) Common Shares that were subject to a stock-settled Stock Appreciation Right and were not issued upon the net settlement or net exercise of such Stock Appreciation Right; or (iv) Common Shares repurchased on the open market with the proceeds of an Option exercise.
# FCM Data April 2014

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF April 30,&KFF0000 &K0000002014FROM REPORTS FILED BY June 01,&KFF0000 &K0000002014	&P of &N
FILED

December 23, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

NOVEMBER 1997 SESSION

BRUCE BELK, )

)

APPELLANT, )

) No. 03-C-01-9703-CR-00109

)

) Morgan County

v. )

) E. Eugene Eblen, Judge

)

) (Habeas Corpus)

CHARLES JONES, WARDEN )

)

 APPELLEE. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

Robert N. Meeks John Knox Walkup

Attorney at Law Attorney General & Reporter

P.O. Box 8086 500 Charlotte Avenue

Chattanooga, TN 37414 Nashville, TN 37243-0497

Michael J. Fahey, II

Assistant Attorney General

450 James Robertson Parkway

Nashville, TN 37243-0493

Charles E. Hawk

District Attorney General

P.O. Box 703

Kingston, TN 37763-0703

Frank A. Harvey

Assistant District Attorney General

P.O. Box 703

Kingston, TN 37763-0703

OPINION FILED:____________________________________

AFFIRMED

Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge
1The appellant was indicted under the name “Bruce D. Belk.” “Bruce Belk” and

“Bruce D. Belk” are the same person.

2

O P I N I O N

The appellant, Bruce Belk1 (petitioner), appeals as of right from a judgment of the

trial court denying his action for habeas corpus relief. He presents one issue for review:

“[T]he charging indictment failed to contain or state the essential mens rea elements of the

offense as required by T.C.A. 40-13-202, thus rendering appellant’s subsequent conviction

and plea agreement void.” After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by

the parties, and the law governing the issue presented for review, it is the opinion of this

court that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

The remedy sought by the petitioner, habeas corpus, was not available to him. The

Hamilton County judgment is not void for the reasons outlined in the petition for the writ

of habeas corpus. When the court rendering the judgment in question has jurisdiction of

the defendant’s person, jurisdiction of the subject matter (the crime), and has the authority

to make the challenged judgment, the judgment is voidable, not void. Passarella v. State,

891 S.W.2d 619, 627 (Tenn. Crim. App.), per. app. denied (Tenn. 1994). Thus, the only

remedy available to the petitioner was post-conviction relief. 

This court parenthetically notes that if the petitioner had pursued the post-conviction

remedy, he would not be entitled to relief. The Tennessee Supreme Court recently held

the indictment, found to be defective in State v. Roger Dale Hill, Sr., Wayne County No.

01-C-01-9508-CC-00267, 1996 WL 346941 (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, June 20, 1996),

was sufficient to allege the offense of aggravated rape, the same offense alleged in this

case. State v. Hill, _____ S.W.2d _____ (Tenn. 1997). The indictment in this case is

almost identical to the indictment in Hill. They charge the same offense. Thus, the

indictment in this case properly alleged the offense of aggravated rape.

____________________________________________

 JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE
3

CONCUR:

 

 

______________________________________

 PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE

______________________________________

 CURWOOD WITT, JUDGE
FILED IN6th COURT OF APPEALS    TEXARKANA, TEXAS3/28/2018 2:20:58 PM      DEBBIE AUTREY              Clerk
Exhibit (d)(178)

FORM OF

SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT

between

FIL INVESTMENT ADVISORS (U.K.) LTD.

and
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 4866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1472]

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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 01-006]

Notice of Prospective Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of prospective patent license.

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

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice that Nascent Technology Solutions, 
LLC, of Hampton, VA, has applied for an exclusive license to practice 
the invention disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 5,393,980 entitled ``QUALITY 
MONITOR AND MONITORING TECHNIQUE EMPLOYING OPTICALLY STIMULATED 
ELECTRON EMISSION,'' which has been assigned to the United States of 
America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration. Written objections to the prospective grant 
of a license should be sent to Langley Research Center.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be received by March 19, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helen M. Galus, Patent Attorney, 
Langley Research Center, Mail Code 212, Hampton, VA 23681-2199; 
telephone (757) 864-3227.

    Dated: January 9, 2001.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-1472 Filed 1-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
```
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 International Surf Resorts, Inc., a
Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Eduardo Biancardi, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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 result of operations of the
      Company.
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
International Surf Resorts, Inc., and will be retained by International Surf
Resorts, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.


/s/ Eduardo
      BiancardiEduardo
      Biancardi
                  Chief Financial
      Officer
                  November
      13, 2008
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

KIMBERLY LATOSHA HAYGOOD, )

DOC #S43083, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2177

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed October 18, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota 

County; Debra Johnes Riva, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender,

and Pamela H. Izakowitz, Assistant Public

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Helene S. Parnes, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, 

for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

LaROSE and SALARIO, JJ., and CASE, JAMES R., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, 

Concur.
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 ImmunoBiotics, Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Raj , certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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 Registrant.





/s/ Vithal J. RajadhyakshaVithal J. Rajadhyaksha

Chief Financial Officer





September 23, 2010
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURUSANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350


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








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of MicroChannel Technologies Corporation
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending February 28, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 13, 2009 (the “Report”), I,
Meetesh Patel, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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:  April
      13, 2009
                /s/ Meetesh PatelMeetesh
      PatelPresident
      and Chief Executive
Officer
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

              (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
                        of Title 18, United States Code)


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18,United States Code), the undersigned
officer of Spantel Communications Inc., a Florida corporation ("The Company"),
does hereby certify with respect to the Annual report of the Company on Form
10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission ("the Form 10-KSB/A")that :

         1) The Form 10-KSB/A 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 Form 10-KSB/A fairly presents, in
         all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.




Dated: August 5, 2005                             /s/ Jose Ramon Basterra
                                                  Jose Ramon Basterra, President
                                                  (Chief Executive Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.38.2



December 10, 1998

Ms. Gale Kaufman
Kaufman Campaign Consultants
1510 J Street, Suite 210
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Gale:

Kaufman Campaign Consultants has been providing Norcal Waste Systems, Inc.
("Norcal") with consulting services in the areas of political affairs, public
affairs, and media and public relations. The services have been provided
pursuant to an agreement, originally signed May 16, 1996 and extended per a
letter agreement dated December 11, 1997. I would like to formalize the
extension of the agreement under the same terms and conditions as contained in
the original document through September 30, 1999.

As stated in the original agreement, the relationship between you and Norcal
will be that of an independent contractor relationship and that the agreement
will not be construed to constitute you an employee of Norcal or the formation
of a partnership or joint venture between you and Norcal.

Consistent with the original agreement, you will receive aggregate fees covering
all services rendered pursuant to this consulting agreement of $9,500 per month
on or before the 5th day of each and every month.

This letter, along with the original agreement letter dated May 15, 1996 and the
extension letter dated December 11, 1997, constitute the understanding under
which you provide services to Norcal. Please acknowledge by signing this letter
and returning it to me at your earliest convenience.

                                       Very truly yours,



                                       /s/ Michael J. Sangiacomo
                                       ----------------------------------------
                                       Michael J. Sangiacomo
                                       President & Chief Executive Officer

Kaufman Campaign Consultants



By: /s/ Gale R. Kaufman
   ---------------------------
        Gale R. Kaufman
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000932699
<NAME>                        GreenMan Technologies, Inc.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   4-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998    
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         161,215          
<SECURITIES>                                         0                
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,744,051        
<ALLOWANCES>                                    58,166           
<INVENTORY>                                    229,037          
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,937,280  
<PP&E>                                      10,239,388       
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,112,815  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,406,759 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,172,731  
<BONDS>                                      5,954,311        
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0          
<PREFERRED>                                  3,200,000        
<COMMON>                                        69,103           
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,366,619       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,406,759 
<SALES>                                      5,034,809        
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,034,809  
<CGS>                                        3,393,053        
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,544,913        
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,674,770  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0          
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             651,316    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,326,086)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,326,086)      
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0          
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0          
<CHANGES>                                            0          
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,326,086)      
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.37)            
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.37)            
                                               


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jason Rivera, Appellant.

[874 NYS2d 856]

— Judgments, Supreme *547Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), rendered on or about October 4, 2006, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny and Freedman, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certification

In connection with the quarterly report of Options Media Group Holdings, Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Scott Frohman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 result of operations of the Company.

| |                 |  |                        
| | --------------- |  | -----------------------
| | August 14, 2008 |  | /s/ Scott Frohman      
| |                 |  | Scott Frohman          
| |                 |  | Chief Executive Officer
| |                 |  |                        





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Federal Register: September 11, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 176)]
[Notices]
[Page 47797]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11se97-47]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Membership of the Commission's Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Membership Change of Performance Review Board.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Office of Personnel Management guidance
under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, notice is hereby given that
the following employees will serve as members of the Commission's
Performance Review Board.
    Chairman: Donald Tendick, Acting Executive Director. Members: Susan
Lee, Executive Assistant to the Chairperson, Office of the Chairperson;
Daniel Waldman, General Counsel, Office of General Counsel; Geoffrey
Aronow, Director, Division of Enforcement; John Mielke, Acting
Director, Division of Economic Analysis.

DATES: This action was effective September 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Office of Human
Resources, Suite 7200, 1155 21st Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jayne Seidman, Director, Office of Human Resources, Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, Suite 7200, 1155 21st Street N.W., Washington, D.C.
20581, (202) 418-5010.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: This action which changes the membership of
the Board supersedes the previously published Federal Register Notice,
July 26, 1996.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on September 5, 1997.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-24036 Filed 9-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO    INDEX ========**

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v George Nager, Appellant.

Submitted February 21, 2012;

decided April 26, 2012

Reported below, 34 Misc 3d 135(A).

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the Court of Appeals does not have jurisdiction to entertain the motion from the order of the Appellate Term *(see*CPLR 5602 [a]).
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

DAMARIO ANTWAN EARL, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0633 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2012-114536-001 DT

The Honorable Hugh E. Hegyi, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Karen Kemper

Counsel for Respondent

Damario Antwan Earl, San Luis

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop, Judge Diane M. Johnsen, and 

Judge Maria Elena Cruz delivered the following decision.

FILED 10-5-2017
STATE v. EARL

Decision of the Court

2

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Damario Antwan Earl seeks review of the 

superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner’s 

second successive petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction 

relief. State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s 

burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying 

the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, ¶ 1 

(App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on 

review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the 

petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse 

of discretion.

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
No. 171.

#### Dakota Corporation *v.*Slope County et al.

October 14, 1935.

*Mr. George E. Wallace*for petitioner.

No appearance for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.