alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
10.08

      


      AMENDMENT
TO SERVICES RETAINER AGREEMENT

      


      THIS
AMENDMENT TO SERVICES RETAINER AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) dated
effective as of December 17, 2009 (the “Effective Date”) is
made by and between SHADES HOLDINGS, INC., a Florida corporation (the “Client”), and The
Tyler Ryan Group, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the “Company”).

      


      BACKGROUND

      


      Client
and Company are parties to that certain Services Retainer Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated
December 17, 2009.  The Agreement did not properly reflect the intent
of the parties regarding the term and duration of the Agreement and the parties
desire to amend the Agreement to properly reflect the initial intent of the
parties.  Accordingly, the Agreement is amended as
follows:

      


      OPERATIVE
PROVISIONS

      


      1.           Section 3,
Amendments/Termination of Agreement.  Section 3,
Amendments/Termination of Agreement, is hereby amended so that, from and after
the Effective Date, it shall read as follows:

       

      “Term; Termination;
Amendment.  The term of this Agreement shall commence on the
Effective Date and shall continue in effect for one (1) year.  Either
party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason or no reason, by
providing fifteen (15) days’ written notice thereof to the other
party.  In the event this Agreement is terminated, the Company will
continue service until the end of the current month.  This Agreement,
and any other document referenced herein, constitute the entire understanding of
the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and no amendment,
modification or alteration of the terms hereof shall be binding unless the same
be in writing, dated subsequent to the date hereof and duly approved and
executed by each of the parties hereto.”

       

      2.           Agreement to Remain in
Effect.  Except as amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect and the parties hereto agree to be bound by the terms
of the Agreement, as amended hereby, as if the Agreement, when executed, had
contained the terms added by this Amendment.

       

      3.           Counterparts.  This
Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.

       

      IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of August 30, 2010,
but effective as of the Effective Date.

       

      
        
          	
                  SHADES
      HOLDINGS, INC.

                	 
      	
                  THE
      TYLER RYAN GROUP, LLC

                
	 
      	 
      	 
      
	
                  By:

                	
                  /s/ Sean Lyons

                	
                    

                	
                  By:

                	
                  /s/ Tyler Ryan

                
	 
      	
                  Sean
      Lyons, President

                	 
      	 
      	
                  Tyler
      Ryan, President
Exhibit (g)(2)

FORM OF

CUSTODIAN AGREEMENT

Dated as of __________

Between

Each of the Investment Companies

Listed on Appendix "A" Attached Hereto

and

THE BANK OF NEW YORK

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**
EXHIBIT
32.2





SECTION
906 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF DOT VN, INC.





In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Dot VN, Inc.
for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, the undersigned, Dr. Lee Johnson, President
of Dot VN, Inc., does hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1) such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2009 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and





(2) the
information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended July 31, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Dot VN, Inc.





Date:
September 14, 2009





/s/ Dr. Lee JohnsonDr.
      Lee JohnsonPresident
      and Chief Financial
Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2





Certification of the Chief 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 Quarterly Report of Kaiser Federal Financial Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dustin Luton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and2.
The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the company’s financial condition and results of operations.











Date: May 13, 2011
/s/ Dustin LutonDustin LutonChief Financial Officer
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

James Wesley Brooks Jackson, Appellant

No. 06

- 13

- 00077

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 372nd District Court of Tarrant County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 1283854R ). Opinion de livered by Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the tr ial court

. We note that the appellant, James Wesley Brooks Jackson, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED FEBRUARY 4, 2014 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         462,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  979,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   344,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,143,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,240,000
<PP&E>                                         182,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  88,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,964,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,804,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,000
<COMMON>                                        41,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,913,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,964,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,237,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,887,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             270,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (650,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (650,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (650,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
        

</TABLE>
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





The
undersigned, Israel Levy, the President, Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer and
Director of CaseyCorp Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the
standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
ended June 30, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.




Date:
August 8,
2008





By:
                Name:
                Title:
              /s/Israel
      Levy
                Israel Levy
                President, Chief Executive Officer,Treasurer and Director (Principal
                Executive, Financial and Accounting
                Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Carbiz Inc. - Exhibit 10.9






FIRST AMENDMENT TO
 PLACEMENT AGENT AGREEMENT

               This
First Amendment (the “First Amendment”) to the Placement Agent Agreement (the
“Agreement”) dated September 29, 2004 by and between CARBIZ, INC., an Ontario
corporation (the “Company”), and INNOVATION CAPITAL, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company (the “Placement Agent”), is made as of this 12th
day of October, 2004 by and between the Company and the Placement Agent.

RECITALS

               WHEREAS,
the Company and the Placement Agent are parties to the Agreement, and such
parties desire to amend the Agreement as stated herein.

               NOW,
THEREFORE, the Company and the Placement Agent hereby agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1.               
Amendments to Section VIII.

	 	(a)	The second sentence of Section VIII(a) of the Agreement shall be
        amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 

      “The Financing Fee shall be paid upon the close of
        the Offering, and the Agent’s Units shall be issued upon the conversion
        of the Debentures held by the Placement Agent Investors.”

	 	 	 
	 	(b)	The following paragraph shall be inserted at the end of Section
        VIII(a) of the Agreement:

      “In the event that the Corporation does not obtain
        an Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board listing within 180 days after October
        12, 2004 and it is thereafter obligated to issue additional Warrants to
        the Placement Agent Investors, the Placement Agent shall be entitled to
        receive, on the date of any such issuance, Agent’s Units equal to
        ten percent (10%) of the aggregate number of Warrants issued to the Placement
        Agent Investors.”




2.               
  Remainder of Agreement Unaffected. Except to the extent expressly stated
  herein, the Agreement shall remain in full force and affect as written.

3.               
Governing Law. The First Amendment shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Florida (without reference to its
choice of law principles), and to the exclusion of the law of any other forum,
without regard to the jurisdiction in which any action or special proceeding may
be instituted.

4.               
Facsimile and Counterpart Signature Pages. This First Amendment may be
executed by facsimile and in one or more counterparts, each of which will be
deemed to be an original and all of which taken together will be deemed to
constitute one in the same agreement.




               IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Investors have executed and delivered this
First Amendment as of the first date written above.

	 	CARBIZ, INC. 	 	 	INNOVATION CAPITAL, LLC. 
	 	  	 	 	  
	By: 	/s/ Carl Ritter	 	By: 	/s/
      Bruce Jordan
	 	Carl Ritter, Chief Executive
      Officer 	 	 	Bruce Jordan, President 


2
| (1)   | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Clear-Lite Holdings, Inc. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  Date:   June 21, 2010 | /s/ David Briones                   David BrionesPrincipal Financial Officer |
|-------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### Earl A. BATES Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MURDY, Ind., Trooper, Delagais, Trooper, Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 09-4618-pr.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

June 30, 2010.

Earl A. Bates Jr., pro se, Newton, CT, for Appellant.

Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of the State of Connecticut; Robert B. Fiske, III, Lynn D. Wittenbrink, Assistant Attorneys General, Hartford, CT, for Ap-pellee.

PRESENT: ROGER J. MINER, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, and RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Earl A. Bates, Jr., *pro se,*alleged that appellees, two Connecticut State Troopers, used excessive force during his arrest on the night of August 1, 2005. He brought suit against the officers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After a trial at which a jury returned a verdict for the appellees, the District Court entered judgment in appellees’ favor on October 7, 2009.

Appellant now appeals the District Court’s judgment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history.

Pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 10(b), it is the appellant’s duty to “order from the reporter a transcript of such parts of the *26proceedings not already on file as the appellant considers necessary ... [or] file a certificate stating that no transcript will be ordered.” Fed. R.App. P. 10(b)(1)(A) and (B); *see also*Fed. R.App. P. 10(b)(2). These transcripts are necessary for meaningful appellate review. This appeal is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to reinstatement provided that appellant, within 30 days of the date of this order, provides this Court with: (1) the trial transcript; (2) proof that he has ordered the trial transcript; or (3) proof that he has moved in the district court for a free trial transcript. Upon timely filing of a transcript in the record on appeal, the Clerk is directed to automatically reinstate this appeal. Within 30 days of the reinstatement of the appeal, the appellant shall file a supplemental brief referring to the pages of the transcript that support the claims for which he seeks appellate review. Appellees will have 30 days within which to respond to the supplemental brief.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, this appeal is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to reinstatement. If the appeal is reinstated, it shall be referred to another merits panel in the normal course.
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Mark K. Ryun, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1)the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Here Enterprises, Inc. for the period ended August 31, 2011 (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 Here Enterprises, Inc.  Dated: October 26, 2011Mark K. RyunMark K. RyunPresident, Secretary, Treasurer, and Director(Principal Executive Officer, Principal FinancialOfficer, and Principal Accounting Officer)
```

[Federal Register: February 25, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 37)]

[Notices]

[Page 9507]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr25fe98-51]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION





Sunshine Act Meeting



"FEDERAL REGISTER" CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 63 F.R. 8167.



PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF MEETING: 2:00 p.m., Thursday,

February 26, 1998.



CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission

changed the meeting to discuss enforcement matters to March 5, 1998 at

2:00 p.m.



CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 98-4982 Filed 2-23-98; 3:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

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

----
#### PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF INDIANA et al. *v.*BATESVILLE TELEPHONE CO.

No. 120.

Jurisdictional statement submitted October 12, 1931.

Decided October 26, 1931.

For opinion below, see 46 F. (2d) 226.

*Messrs. James M. Ogden*and, *G. W. Hufsmith*for appellants.

*Messrs. Wm. H. Thompson*and *Albert. L. Rabb*for appellee.

*Per Curiam:*

This suit was brought to restrain the enforcement of an order of the Public-; Service Commission of Indiana upon the grounds that the commission had exceeded its authority and that the order violated the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. The District Court (a single judge sitting, as an interlocutory injunction was not sought, *Stratton*v. *St. Louis, S. W. Ry. Co.,*282 U. S. 10, 15) dismissed the bill for want of equity. The decree was reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, which directed that the relief for which the bill prayed be granted. The sole ground of the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals was that the Public Service Commission had no jurisdiction únder the law of the State to make the order.

*7The statute governing appeals to this Court from the Circuit Court of Appeals is § 240 of-the Judicial Code as amended by the Act of February 13, 1925 (c. 229, 43 Stat. 936, 938), which provides in paragraphs (b) and (c) as follows:

> “(b) Any case in a Circuit Court of Appeals where is drawn in question the validity of a statute of any State, on the ground of its being repugnant to the. Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, and the decision is against its validity, -may, at the election of the party relying on such state statute, be taken to the Supreme Court for review on writ of error or appeal; but in that event a review on certiorari shall not be allowed at the instance of such party, and the review on such writ of error or appeal shall be restricted to an* examination and decision of the federal questions presented in the case.

> “(c) No judgment or decree of a Circuit Court of Appeals or of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia shall be subject to review by the Supreme Court otherwise than as provided in this section.”

, The plain intent of this statute is to limit appeals to this Court from a Circuit Court of Appeals to cases where its decision is against the validity of a statute of a State upon the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws .of the United States. In other cases, review' by this Court, if it be had, must be pursuant to a writ -of certiorari duly applied for- and granted.

As in this case the Circuit Court of Appeals did not decide - against the validity of the order of the Public Service Commission .upon the asserted federal grounds, but dealt with its validity, solely under the state law, the appeal must be dismissed." [See *post,,*p. 578.3
Exhibit 31                  Rule 13a-14(d) Certification

                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Michael L. Parker, a President and Director of Washington Mutual
Mortgage Securities Corp., certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
8-K  containing  distribution  or servicing  reports filed in respect of periods
included  in  the  year  covered  by  this  annual  report,   of  WAMU  MORTGAGE
PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2001-S9;

     2. Based on my knowledge,  the  information  in these  reports,  taken as a
whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state
a  material  fact  necessary  to make  the  statements  made,  in  light  of the
circumstances  under which such  statements  were made, not misleading as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

     3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  distribution  or  servicing  information
required to be provided  to the  trustee by the  servicer  under the pooling and
servicing, or similar,  agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
these reports;

     4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities  performed by the servicer
under the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,  agreement  and based  upon my
knowledge and the annual  compliance  review required under that agreement,  and
except as disclosed in the reports,  the servicer has fulfilled its  obligations
under that agreement; and

     5. The  reports  disclose  all  significant  deficiencies  relating  to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an  independent  public  accountant,  after  conducting  a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single  Attestation  Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar  procedure,  as set forth in the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following  unaffiliated  third parties acting as servicers
and sub-servicers:

Washington Mutual


Dated: March 15, 2004
                                     /s/ Michael L. Parker
                                         Michael L. Parker,
                                         President and Director
<Page>


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Post-Effective Amendment
No. 19 to Registration Statement No. 033-71686 of Separate Account A of Union
Security Life Insurance Company of New York (formerly First Fortis Life
Insurance Company) on Form N-4, of our report dated February 24, 2005,
relating to the statements of assets and liabilities of Separate Account A as
of December 31, 2004, and the related statements of operations for the year
then ended and the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two
years in the period ended December 31, 2004, appearing in the Statement of
Additional Information, which is incorporated by reference in such
Registration Statement, and to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in such Statement of Additional Information.

/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
October 21, 2005