alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3


 


AMENDMENT TO LOAN AGREEMENT



 


This Amendment to Loan
Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of June 10, 2018, by GPIC, Ltd. (“GPIC”)
and Rimini Street, Inc. (as successor to GP Investments Acquisition Corp.) (the “Company”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, GPIC and the
Company are parties to that certain Loan Agreement, dated as October 6, 2017 (as may be amended, the “Loan Agreement”),
whereby GPIC made a loan to the Company pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Loan Agreement. Capitalized terms
used herein but not otherwise defined shall have their respective meaning as set forth in the Loan Agreement.


 


WHEREAS, GPIC and the
Company desire to amend the Loan Agreement pursuant to the terms herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


1.       Amendment
to the Loan Agreement. The fourth paragraph of the Loan Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


   “It is hereby agreed between
GPIC and the Company that the Loan Amount shall become immediately due and payable on January 4, 2019.”


 


   Except as expressly amended
by this Amendment, the Loan Agreement remains unmodified and in full force and effect, and is hereby ratified and confirmed.


 


2.       Effective
Date. This Amendment shall become effective upon the closing of the purchase and sale of common stock and preferred stock pursuant
to that certain Securities Purchase Agreement, dated on the date hereof, by and among the Company, VPC Special Opportunities Fund
III Onshore, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and the other purchasers named therein. Upon any termination of the Securities
Purchase Agreement in accordance with its terms, this Amendment shall be null and void.


 


3.       Miscellaneous.
This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute a single instrument.
Copies of this Amendment may be executed and delivered via ‘PDF’ or other electronic means with the same force and
effect as originals.


 


[Signature Pages Follow]


 




    	 	1	 



     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned have, intending to be legally bound hereby, have executed this Amendment, as of the date first set forth above.


 


	 	Rimini Street, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Seth A. Ravin
	 	Name:	Seth A. Ravin
	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer


 


[Signature Page to GPIC Loan Amendment]


 






     


     


    

 





	 	GPIC, Ltd.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Antonio Bonchristiano
	 	Name:	Antonio Bonchristiano
	 	Title:	Authorized Officer


 


[Signature Page to GPIC Loan Amendment]
---

Exhibit 99.16

Consent of Andrew Jennings

I consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of AuRico Gold Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of references to my name in connection with the following reports and documents,
included in the 2012 Annual Information Form of AuRico Gold Inc., dated April 1, 2013 (the “AIF”):

Sections 15.6.3, 16.5 of the NI 43-101 Technical Report for the Kemess Underground Project, British Columbia, Canada

I also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-177638, File No. 333-175079 and File No. 333-173458 ) and in the Registration Statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-177404) of the references to
my name and the above-mentioned information in the AIF.

Dated this 1st day of April, 2013.

/s/ Andrew JenningsBy: Andrew Jennings, P.E. 
Title: Project Manager 
Company: Conveyor Dynamics, Inc.

---
Alicia A. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security.

No. 17-5550.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 10, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Applebee's  International,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the  quarterly  period ended June 26, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  in the capacities and dates indicated  below,  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) The  Report  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 the Report fairly presents,  in
all material respects,  the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



Date: July 27, 2005                    By: /s/ Lloyd L. Hill
      ---------------------               --------------------------------------
                                          Lloyd L. Hill
                                          Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Applebee's  International,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the  quarterly  period ended June 26, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  in the capacities and dates indicated  below,  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) The  Report  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 the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects,  the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



Date: July 27, 2005                    By: /s/ Steven K. Lumpkin
      ----------------------              --------------------------------------
                                          Steven K. Lumpkin
                                          Chief Financial Officer
Alan Lewis DOERING, petitioner, v. Bill HOLLENBECK, Sheriff, Sebastian County, Arkansas, et al.

No. 17-5474.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 10, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
# C_2011173EN.01000901.xml

| 11.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/9

---

Order of the President of the Court of 9 February 2011 — Nokia Oyj v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Medion AG

(Case C-154/10 P) (1)

1

2011/C 173/18

Language of the case: Finnish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.

1

---
# L_2012247EN.01001604.xml

| 13.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 247/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 247/16

---

Corrigendum to Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2011 of 21 October 2011 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) and Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 341 of 22 December 2011
  )

On page 73, in the indent of Article 2, the words ‘Commission Regulation (EC) No 365/2010’ shall be replaced by ‘Commission Regulation (EU) No 365/2010’.

---
John H. DAVIS, petitioner, v. Jeanne W. ANDERSON, et al.

No. 17M125.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 4, 2018.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Terence BONNER, petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, et al.

No. 16-8423.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
Joseph NICHOLS, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 17-5228.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
H. R. 4258 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen 

An Act 

To authorize the Marshal of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police 

to protect the Justices, employees, and official guests of the Supreme Court 

outside of the Supreme Court grounds, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reauthorizing Security for 

Supreme Court Justices Act of 2019’’. 

SEC. 2. PROTECTION AUTHORITY OF MARSHAL OF THE SUPREME 

COURT AND SUPREME COURT POLICE. 

Section 6121 of title 40, United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in subsection (a)— 

(A) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘any State’’ and inserting ‘‘any location’’; and 

(B) in paragraph (3)— 

(i) by striking ‘‘violation of federal or state law’’ 

and inserting ‘‘violation of Federal or State law’’; and 

(ii) by striking ‘‘regulation under federal or state 

law’’ and inserting ‘‘regulation under Federal or State 

law’’; and 

(2) in subsection (b)— 

(A) by striking paragraph (2); 

(B) by striking ‘‘ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS’’ and all 

that follows through ‘‘Duties under’’ and inserting 

‘‘AUTHORIZATION TO CARRY FIREARMS—Duties under’’; and 

(C) by striking ‘‘any State’’ and inserting ‘‘any location’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
II-O0115

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Marguerite Demos <mdntls@netscape.net>

Sunday, December 5, 2010 10:23 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Marguerite Demos

900 N Dickel

Anaheim, CA 92805
Marcus Shuaib SMITH, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5999.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Release #4221-98 (Civ 98-2575-CWT 26C)

For Release: December 23, 1998

FLORIDA COURT ISSUES ASSET FREEZE AND APPOINTS RECEIVER IN CFTC
    ACTION CHARGING FRAUDULENT COMMODITY POOL; CFTC CHARGES MICHAEL COLTON AND
    FUTURE-COMM TRADING WITH DEFRAUDING CUSTOMERS THROUGH PERSONAL
    SOLICITATIONS AND AN INTERNET SITE

WASHINGTON � The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
    announced today that the Honorable Richard A. Lazzara of the U.S. District
    Court for the Middle District of Florida issued an ex parte
    order against Michael Colton of Dunedin, Florida, individually and
    doing business as Future-Comm Trading (Future-Comm), which
    freezes Colton's assets, appoints a receiver to take charge of the
    business operations and marshal assets for potential redress to injured
    customers, and grants CFTC representatives immediate access to books and
    records. Neither Colton nor Future-Comm is registered with the Commission
    in any capacity.

The CFTC's complaint alleges that,
    from January 1997 to the present, the defendants have violated anti-fraud
    provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) (sections 4b(a) and 4o(1))
    by fraudulently soliciting at least $650,000 from members of the public to
    invest in the Future-Comm commodity pool.

According to the complaint, through an Internet site
    (www.futurecommtrading.net), brochures, and in-person sales presentations,
    Colton enticed prospective investors by claiming that the Future-Comm pool
    has generated substantial profits, such as a 495 percent or 660 percent
    return in 1997, and that such returns are accomplished with low risk. The
    complaint alleges that, in reality, the Future-Comm pool suffered
    considerable losses due to Colton's placement of losing trades on
    futures and options contracts and his routine misappropriation of pool
    funds.

The complaint also charges that Colton violated other provisions of the
    CEA and CFTC regulations by falsely representing that Future-Comm is a
    commodity pool operator registered with the CFTC (section 4h of the CEA);
    acting as an unregistered commodity pool operator and commodity trading
    advisor (section 4m of the CEA); and mishandling customer funds by, among
    other things, accepting and trading funds in his own name and commingling
    property of the pool with his own property or the property of others (CFTC
    regulations 4.20 and 4.30).

In its continuing litigation, the CFTC is seeking preliminary and
    permanent civil injunctions in addition to other remedial relief including
    restitution to customers.

# # #
In Re Robert Lynn PRUETT, petitioner.

No. 17-6313 (17A391).

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 12, 2017.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice ALITO and by him to referred to the Court denied. Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 22532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08044]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan 
Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et 
seq.) (HOLA), Regulation LL (12 CFR part 238), and Regulation MM (12 
CFR part 239), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to 
become a savings and loan holding company and/or to acquire the assets 
or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a 
savings association.
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on whether the 
proposed transaction complies with the standards enumerated in the HOLA 
(12 U.S.C. 1467a(e)).
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than May 16, 2022.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (Brent B. Hassell, Assistant 
Vice President) P.O. Box 27622, Richmond, Virginia 23261. Comments can 
also be sent electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f7b4989a9a92998384d99687879b9e9496839e989984b7859e949fd9918595d9988590"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f8bb9795959d968c8bd699888894919b998c9197968bb88a919b90d69e8a9ad6978a9f">[email protected]</span></a>:
    1. Piedmont Financial Holding Company, Winston-Salem, North 
Carolina; to become a mutual savings and loan holding company upon the 
conversion of Piedmont Federal Savings Bank, Winston-Salem, North 
Carolina, from federal mutual savings bank to a federal stock savings 
bank.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 11, 
2022.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2022-08044 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0161. FRANK BURNS v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE

ASSOCIATION.

Federal National Mortgage Association obtained a writ of possession against

Frank Burns in magistrate court. Burns appealed to the superior court, which issued

a final order granting a writ of possession to Federal National Mortgage Association

on June 18, 2013. Burns filed a notice of appeal from this order on June 28, 2013.

Federal National Mortgage Association filed a motion to dismiss Burns’ notice of

appeal because it was filed outside the seven-day time limit set forth in OCGA § 44-

7-56 for appeals of judgments entered in dispossessory actions. However, the trial

court denied the motion, finding that the untimeliness was due to the fact that Burns’

counsel did not receive notice of the entry of the final order. Pretermitting whether

the case should be dismissed as untimely, we lack jurisdiction to consider the direct

appeal for another reason. 

Because the case reached the superior court by virtue of a de novo appeal from

magistrate court, Burns was required to follow the discretionary appeal procedures

to seek appellate review in this Court. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (11); Strachan v.

Meritor Mortgage Corp. East, 216 Ga. App. 82 (453 SE2d 119) (1995). His failure

to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

October 16, 2014
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

10/16/2014
Release: #4107-98 (C2-94-981)

For Release: February 17, 1998

OHIO COURT ISSUES PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST JEFFREY A. SMITH OF
    WESTERVILLE, OHIO, ORDERING HIM TO DISGORGE ILL-GOTTEN GAINS

Court Order Stems from a Six-Count Anti-Fraud Enforcement Action
    Brought Against Smith and Two Other Defendants in 1994 by the CFTC and the
    State of Ohio

WASHINGTON -- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced
    today that on January 27, 1998, U.S. District Court Judge John Holschuh Sr.
    of the Southern District of Ohio issued a consent order of permanent
    injunction against Jeffrey A. Smith of Westerville, Ohio -- formerly
    an officer of Allied Financial Group, Inc. (AFG) of Powell, Ohio. A
    similar order was entered against Smith's co-defendants, Robert Bobo
    of Worthington, Ohio and AFG, on November 19, 1997 (See CFTC News Release
    #4086-97, December 11, 1997).

The orders were entered by consent to settle a six-count injunctive
    complaint which the CFTC and the Ohio Division of Securities filed on
    October 11, 1994, against AFG, Bobo and Smith in the U.S. District Court,
    charging that during the period from February 1993 through October 1994 the
    defendants cheated and defrauded commodity pool investors. According to the
    complaint, the defendants solicited $844,093 from approximately 60 Ohio
    residents by falsely representing to investors and potential investors that
    they were operating a highly profitable commodity futures pool. In reality,
    the complaint alleges, defendants misappropriated most of the money for
    their own use and only invested a small portion of the funds in commodity
    futures. According to the complaint, throughout this time period, the
    defendants issued false reports and monthly statements to investors showing
    increasing profits from commodity trading when, in fact, no trading was
    occurring. (See CFTC News Release 3793-94, October 14, 1994.)

Under the terms of the consent order, Smith, without admitting or
    denying the allegations of the complaint, has agreed to be permanently
    enjoined from committing further violations of sections 4b(a)(i),
    4b(a)(ii), 4o(1), and 4n(3)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act and
    CFTC regulations 4.20(c) and 4.23, as charged, and to pay $35,195.91, the
    amount he received from his participation in the enterprise (which includes
    pre-judgment interest), plus post-judgment interest, to A.C. Strip, a
    court-appointed administrator (tel: 614-228-6345), for the benefit of AFG
    investors. Smith's payment will be in addition to the $150,336 in
    restitution already paid by his co-defendants AFG and Bobo.

Among other things, under the consent order, Smith also agreed not to
    seek or become registered with the CFTC, not to act as a commodity pool
    operator, commodity trading advisor, and a securities dealer or salesman,
    among other capacities, and not to solicit money from the public for any
    investment in commodity futures or option contracts, securities, physical
    commodities, or financial instruments.