alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
KBS Legacy PEA no.7 Ex.10.32




Exhibit 10.32
FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of April 4, 2012  (the “Effective Date”) by and between KBS-Legacy Apartment Community REIT Venture, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Buyer”) and Crescent Apartments, LLC, a South Carolina limited liability company (“Seller”).
Buyer and Seller entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (“Contract”) for the purchase and sale of certain real property located in Greer, South Carolina as more particularly described in the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Buyer and Seller amend the Contract as follows:
1.Defined Terms.  Any defined term used in this Amendment that is not specifically defined herein shall have the meaning given to such term in the Contract.
2.    Extension of Due Diligence Period.  The expiration of the Due Diligence Period is hereby extended to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 12, 2012.
3.    Closing Date.  The first sentence of Section 6.1 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
“The Transaction shall close (“Closing”) on May 7, 2012 (as may be extended in accordance with the terms hereof, the “Closing Date”).”
4.    No Further Changes.  Except as amended hereby, the Contract shall remain in full force and effect.  To the extent any of the terms of the Contract conflict with this Amendment, this Amendment shall control.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts.  Signed counterparts transmitted by facsimile or email shall constitute originals.
[Signature Page Follows]





The parties have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date.
SELLER:
Crescent Apartments, LLC, a South Carolina limited liability 
company
By:    WP Crescent, L.L.C.,    a Georgia limited liability company,
its manager
By:    WP East Development Enterprises, L.L.C., a 
Delaware limited liability company, its sole
manager
By:    Wood Real Estate Investors, L.L.C., a
Delaware limited liability company, its
manager 
By:    /s/ David E. Thompson    
Name:    David E. Thompson        
Title:    Vice President            


BUYER:
KBS-Legacy Apartment Community REIT Venture, LLC, 
a Delaware limited liability company 
By:    Legacy Partners Residential Realty LLC, 
a Delaware limited liability company, 
its managing member  


By:    /s/ Guy K. Hays            
Name:    Guy K. Hays, as trustee of the Hays 2009 Revocable Trust
Title:    a Managing Member
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T CESA R A U G U STO CI SN ERO SVA LDEZ , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 72332 A ge nc yN o. A 027- 551- 191 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d F e bruary21, 2012 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , M cK E O W N , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C e s arA ugus t o C i s ne r os - V a l de z , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of G ua t e m a l a , pe t i t i ons f o rr e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd is m is s in g h is appe a l f r om a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i on f orpr ot e c t i on 

# FI LED MA R 02 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 72332 2 un der the C on vent i on A gai nstT orture ( “ C A T ”) . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e f a c tu a l f in d in g s . Zehat

ye v. G on zales , 453 F . 3d 1182, 1184- 85 ( 9th C i r . 2006) . W e de nythe pe t i t i on f or r e v i e w. S ub st an t i al ev i d en ce sup p o rt s th e B IA ’ s d en i al o f C A T rel i ef b ecau se C i sner os-V al dez f

ai l ed t o est abl i sh i ti s m ore l i kel y than n othe w ou l d b e t ortured a t th e in s tig a tio n o rw ith th e a c q u ie s c e n c e o f th e G u ate m a lan g o v e rn m e n t. See Si laya v. Mukasey , 5 2 4 F . 3 d1 0 6 6 , 1 0 7 3 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 8 ). W e rej ectC i sn ero sV al dez’ s c on t ent i on thatthe agency di d n otconsi der the S t at e D epartm entcoun try r e p o rt a s h e h a s n o t o v e r c o m e th e p r e s u m p tio n th a t it c o n s id e r e dth is e v id e n c e . See Ferna ndezv. G on zales , 4 3 9 F . 3 d5 9 2 , 6 0 3 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ). A cco rd i n g l y, C i sn ero s-V al d ez’ s C A T cl ai m fai l s. P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                                                 NORTHWEST AIRLINES CORPORATION

                                                        NORTHWEST AIRLINES
                                                            CORPORATION
                                                           Delaware Corp.


                                                              NWA INC.
                                                           Delaware Corp.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>             <C>                <C>                 <C>                 <C>                <C>                  <C>
 NORTHWEST         NORTHWEST          MLT INC.             NORTHWEST        NWA AIRCRAFT      NORTHWEST CAPITAL    NORTHWEST PARS
AIRCRAFT INC.      AEROSPACE       Minnesota Corp.       AIRLINES, INC.     FINANCE, INC.       FUNDING CORP.      HOLDINGS, INC.
Delaware Corp.   TRAINING CORP.                          Minnesota Corp.    Delaware Corp.     Delaware Corp.      Delaware Corp.
                 Delaware Corp.


<C>
EXPRESS AIRLINES I, INC.
Georgia Corp.

</TABLE>

                                                            99% LIMITED PARTNER


                                     WINGS FINANCE       WIN-WIN L.P.
                                        COMPANY        Delaware Limited
                                    Japanese Corp.       Partnership


* Each subsidiary is 100% wholly-owned unless otherwise noted.
Johnaton Sampson GEORGE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5475.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

*593Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 1:23-CR-50-MAC

'

KALEP DOLEN HILL, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Stetson conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed by 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued her Findings of Fact and Recommendation 

on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. Judge Stetson recommended that 

the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. She further recommended that the court adjudge 

the Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment filed against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to Judge Stetson’s findings. The court ORDERS that the 

Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate Judge are 

ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea 

agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Kalep Dolen Hill, is adjudged 

Case 1:23-cr-00050-MAC-ZJH Document 28 Filed 09/15/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 77
2

guilty as to Count One of the Indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C §§ 922(n) and 

924(a)(l)(D)—Illegal Receipt of a Firearm by a Person under Indictment.

Case 1:23-cr-00050-MAC-ZJH Document 28 Filed 09/15/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 78
** 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**I, William A. Priddy, Jr., Chief Financial Officer, Corporate VicePresident of Administration and Secretary of RF Micro Devices, Inc. (the“Company”), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)           the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the fiscal quarter ended June 27, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

      /s/William A. Priddy, Jr.                            William A. Priddy, Jr.     Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Vice      President of Administration and Secretary           August 6, 2009
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2762
PHILIP M. COOPER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusS. C. SPRADLIN, Officer; L. M. WETZEL, Officer; VIRGINIA COCHRAN, Judge; W. S. HUMPHREY, Officer; CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; LONDON BRIDGE MOTOR COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-1106-2) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Philip M. Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Michael Golski, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lee Melchor Turlington, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Jeff Wayne Rosen, ADLER, ROSEN & PETERS, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).23 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Cooper v. Spradlin , No. CA-94-1106-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 6, 1995; June 28, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
ST. BERNARD PARISH, et al., petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-359.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
Theophilus K. UDEIGWE, petitioner, v. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY, et al.

No. 18-6022.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '

'

versus ' NO. 9:23-CR-17-1-MAC

'

NATHANIEL MOORE '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Stetson conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed by 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued her Findings of Fact and Recommendation 

on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. Judge Stetson recommended that 

the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. She further recommended that the court adjudge 

the Defendant guilty on Count One of the Information filed against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to Judge Stetson’s findings. The court ORDERS that the 

Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate Judge are 

ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea 

agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Nathaniel Moore, is adjudged 

Case 9:23-cr-00017-MAC-ZJH Document 99 Filed 07/11/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 542
2

guilty as to Count One of the Information charging a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 and 18 

U.S.C. § 2–Possession with the Intent to Distribute Cocaine.

________________________________________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 11th day of July, 2024.

Case 9:23-cr-00017-MAC-ZJH Document 99 Filed 07/11/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 543
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2080 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2080

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to transport maximum security 
  prisoners across State lines to prisons that are not classified to 
                   handle maximum security prisoners.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 8, 1999

Mr. Traficant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to transport maximum security 
  prisoners across State lines to prisons that are not classified to 
                   handle maximum security prisoners.

    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 ``Prisoner Transfer Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. TRANSPORT OF MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISONERS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 87 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1794. Transport of maximum security prisoners
    ``Whoever, knowing or having reason to know that an individual is a 
prisoner pursuant to conviction for crime under State or Federal law, 
who is classified as a maximum security prisoner, knowingly transports 
that individual across a State line, other than to a prison or other 
facility classified as a maximum security prison or facility, shall be 
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 87 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following:

``1794. Transport of maximum security prisoners.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1


                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

Pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Fidelity Federal Bancorp
hereby certifies that:

     1.   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Fidelity Federal Bancorp for the
          quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
          Exchange Commission on August XX, 2004 (the Report) fully complies
          with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
          applicable, 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 Fidelity Federal Bancorp.



Dated:  August 12, 2004


/s/ Donald R. Neel
-----------------------------------
    Donald R. Neel
    President and
    Chief Executive Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference to any filing of Fidelity Federal Bancorp, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.
---

---

Exhibit 13.2

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 annual report
of Silicom Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I the undersigned, being the 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, that to my knowledge:

|1) | The
Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 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.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Signature: /S/ Eran GiladEran Gilad, Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 30, 2007



---

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,033
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  403,335
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,860
<INVENTORY>                                    137,545
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               574,241
<PP&E>                                         497,807
<DEPRECIATION>                                 112,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 965,820
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          868,310
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      75,582<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   965,820
<SALES>                                      5,294,697
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,294,697
<CGS>                                        5,162,092
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,287,468
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,165
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,067)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,067)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.00)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)
<FN>
<F1>"Other SE" represents consolidated Partners' Capital.
<F2>"EPS Primary" represents Basic Common EPS of $(0.17) and Basic Subordinated EPS
of $(0.26).
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONIC CO., LTD and 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-CV-00103-JRG-RSP

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER 

Before the Court is Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Excuse Lead Counsel from the 

October 2, 2024 Discovery Hearing. The Court, having considered the same, is of the opinion that 

the Motion should be GRANTED.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Ruffin B. Cordell is excused from attending the 

October 2, 2024 discovery hearing. 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 155-1 Filed 09/27/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 6044
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

C.M., Appellant,
v. A.M. and W.M., Appellees. No. 2D23-523 April 3, 2024Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Caroline TescheArkin, Judge. Mark A. Neumaier, Tampa, for Appellant. Raymond T. Elligett, Jr., of Buell & Elligett, P.A., Tampa; Jeanne T. Tate of Jeanne T. Tate, P.A., Tampa; and Michael L. Lundy of Older & Lundy, Tampa, for Appellees. KHOUZAM, Judge. Affirmed in all respects, except that the appeal as to the court's ruling on entitlement to sanctions is dismissed as premature. See Kelly v. HSBC Bank USA Nat'l Ass'n, 240 So. 3d 107, 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) ("We dismiss the attempt to appeal the order granting in part HSBC's motion for sanctions, because the order only addressed entitlement and2

not the amount of attorney's fees to be imposed against Kelly. That attempt was premature, and the order on entitlement to sanctions was not an appealable order."). Affirmed in part; dismissed in part. NORTHCUTT and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.

__________________________ Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
JAKKS PACIFIC, INC., petitioner, v. ACCASVEK LLC.

No. 18-385.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.

Justice KAVANAUGH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 1:23-CR-56

'

DEVANTE WADE RICHARD, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Hawthorn conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed 

by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued his Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate 

judge recommended that the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. He further 

recommended that the court adjudge the Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment filed 

against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to the magistrate judge’s findings. The court ORDERS 

that the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate 

Judge are ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the 

plea agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Devante Wade Richard, is 

Case 1:23-cr-00056-MAC-ZJH Document 34 Filed 04/17/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 146
2

adjudged guilty as to Count One of the Indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 

922(g)(1) - Felon in Possession of a Firearm.

Signed this date

Apr 17, 2024

Case 1:23-cr-00056-MAC-ZJH Document 34 Filed 04/17/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 147