alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 10.3

                                   SCHEDULE A

                Potential Value of Redwood Securities Group, Inc.
                                Stock Dividend to
               Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc. Shareholders
               ---------------------------------------------------


1.       Determination of Dividend Ownership

              51% x 1.50 = 91.8 (percentage ownership of Class A stock, post
                 1.50 conversion right)(2)
              49% x 1.00 = 49.0 (percentage ownership of Class B stock)
                         ------
                Total     140.8

              91.8 divided by 140.8 = 65.2% (Class A stock, % of Total
                 Enterprise Value)
              49.0 divided by 140.8 = 34.8% (Class B stock, % of Total
                 Enterprise Value)


2.       Market Price Capitalization

              4.55 (Sales/Price Ratio)(3 x $6.5M (estimated current revenue
                 based on FY2003, including estimated revenue from new Los
                 Angeles office, formerly Morgan Stanley, 8 brokers x $150,000
                 in annual revenue production) ($5.3M + $1.2M = 6.5M) = $29.575M


3.       Attributed Value Allocation: Class A vs. Class B

              $29.575M x 65.2% = $19.28M
              $29.575M x 34.8% = $10.29M


4.       Value of Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc. Stock Distribution

              Class A stock: 12%, Redwood's ownership to be distributed to
              Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc. Preferred Shareholders: (4)

                             $19.28M x 12% = $2.13M

              Class B stock: 15%, Redwood's ownership to be distributed to
              Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc. Common Shareholders:(5)

                             $10.29M x 15% = $1.54M

              Estimated Total Value of Redwood Securities Group, Inc. stock
              dividend to Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc. Shareholders:

                            $2.13M + $1.54M = $3.67M

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

(2)   See Paragraph 4 c. of the Stock Acquisition-Distribution Agreement Between
      Redwood Securities Group, Inc. and Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc.
(3)   Refer to Yahoo Finance website. ,
      http://biz.yahoo.com/p/brokerconameu.html. This data was accessed on
      12/27/2003.
(4)   See Paragraph 4 e. of the Stock Acquisition-Distribution Agreement Between
      Redwood Securities Group, Inc. and Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc.
(5)   See Paragraph 4 f. of the Stock Acquisition-Distribution Agreement Between
      Redwood Securities Group, Inc. and Global Medical Products Holdings, Inc.
10f-3 REPORT
            SMITH BARNEY ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND
            December 1, 1997 through May 31, 1998
                              
              Trade                     Purchase  % of
Issuer             Date       Selling Dealer      Amount
Price          Issue(1)
Puerto Rico G.O.         1/15/98   Morgan Stanley $5,000,000
$36.839        4.90%
 0.000% due 7/1/2018

Puerto Rico Highway   2/26/98      Merrill Lynch   4.485,469
38.220         3.15
 0.000% due 7/1/2017
# C_2018325EN.01000101.xml

| 14.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 325/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/1

---

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 6 September 2018

to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Banco de España

(ECB/2018/22)

(2018/C 325/01)

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.

| (2) | The mandate of Banco de España’s current external auditors, KPMG Auditores, S.L., ended after the audit for the financial year 2017. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2018. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The mandate of Banco de España’s current external auditors, KPMG Auditores, S.L., ended after the audit for the financial year 2017. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2018.

| (3) | Banco de España has selected the temporary association of undertakings Mazars Auditores, S.L.P. - Mazars, S.A. as its external auditors for the financial years 2018 to 2020, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial years 2021 and 2022, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Banco de España has selected the temporary association of undertakings Mazars Auditores, S.L.P. - Mazars, S.A. as its external auditors for the financial years 2018 to 2020, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial years 2021 and 2022,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the temporary association of undertakings Mazars Auditores, S.L.P. - Mazars, S.A. should be appointed as the external auditors of Banco de España for the financial years 2018 to 2020, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial years 2021 and 2022.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 6 September 2018.

The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI

---
(logo) CWCapital

ASSETMANAGEMENT

 

 

 

 

**Annual Statement asto Compliance**

**For the Period ofJanuary 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018**

 

 

**CSAIL 2017-CX10**

 

 

Inaccordance with Item 1123 of Regulation AB and with the requirements detailedin §10.11 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) forthe above-mentioned CMBS pool, CWCapital Asset Management LLC (“CWCAM”),in its capacity as Special Servicer, is providing this Officer’s Certificatewith respect to the following:

 

(A)    a review of CWCAM’sactivities during the preceding calendar year or portion thereof (the “ReportingPeriod”) and of CWCAM’s performance under the Agreement has been made undersuch officer’s supervision; and

 

(B)    that, to the bestof such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM has fulfilled all itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

Shouldyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.  

 

Sincerely,

CWCapitalAsset Management LLC

/s/James P. Shevlin 

JamesP. Shevlin

President/ChiefOperating Officer

 

 

7501Wisconsin Avenue | Suite 500 West | Bethesda, MD | 20814
Vinodh RAGHUBIR, Petitioner, v. Mark S. INCH, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 19-5148.

Supreme Court of the United States.

Oct. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
John MCGILL, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5497.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 42 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 42

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
 clarify that the Constitution neither prohibits voluntary prayer nor 
                      requires prayer in schools.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2013

    Mr. Rahall introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
 clarify that the Constitution neither prohibits voluntary prayer nor 
                      requires prayer in schools.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article --

    ``Nothing in this Constitution, including any amendment to this 
Constitution, shall be construed to prohibit voluntary prayer or 
require prayer in a public school, or to prohibit voluntary prayer or 
require prayer at a public school extracurricular activity.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31.a

I, John P. Manning, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCTC V Assignor Corp. (the "Assignor");
2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Assignor as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Assignor and have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the Assignor, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the Assignor's disclosure controls and procedures  and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
3. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



1. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Assignor's auditors and the audit committee of the Assignor's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Assignor's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Assignor's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  May 15, 2007 | /s/ John P. Manning 
|------------------- | --------------------
|                    | John P. Manning     
|                    | Director, President 
|                    | (Principal Executive
|                    | Officer), BCTC V    
|                    | Assignor Corp.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

RIGHTQUESTION, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. 

AT&T INC., AT&T CORP., AT&T

MOBILITY LLC, AT&T MOBILITY II 

LLC, and AT&T SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00094-JRG-RSP

ORDER

Before the Court is the Notice of Dismissal Without Prejudice of AT&T Inc. (the “Notice”) 

filed by Plaintiff RightQuestion, LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 15.) In the Notice, Plaintiff voluntarily 

dismisses the claims and causes of action against Defendant AT&T Inc. without prejudice pursuant to 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (Id. at 1.) 

Having considered the Notice, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all 

claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff in the above-captioned case with respect to Defendant 

AT&T Inc. are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, 

and attorneys’ fees. The above-captioned case is to remain OPEN in light of the remaining parties and 

claims.

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 29th day of April, 2024.
IN RE Isidro ROMAN, Petitioner.

No. 19-5200.

Supreme Court of the United States.

Oct. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
# C_2017404EN.01000301.xml

| 29.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 404/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 404/3

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 4 April 2016 concerning a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives

Rapporteur: France

(2017/C 404/03)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees that the values of sales and the fine should be amended for the addressee. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees that the values of sales and the fine should be amended for the addressee.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fine |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fine

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amount of the fine. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amount of the fine.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---
Galen Lemar AMERSON, et al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR the DISTRICT OF COLORADO

No. 18-9201

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until October 28, 2019, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.

Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1043 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1043

    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Disperse Blue 60.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 2013

   Mr. Watt introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Disperse Blue 60.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DISPERSE BLUE 60.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.50 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Disperse Blue 60) is amended 
by striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/
31/2016''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1050 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1050

     To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Disperse Red 73.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 2013

   Mr. Watt introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Disperse Red 73.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DISPERSE RED 73.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.57 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Disperse Red 73) is amended 
by striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/
31/2016''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 4.9



 Exhibit 4.9 
  
 Amendment to 1999 Stock Option Plan 
  
 By way of a resolution adopted through a unanimous written consent by the Corporation’s board of directors, without shareholder action, on January
22, 2004, the section entitled “Automatic Awards to Non-Employee Directors” of the Corporation’s 1999 Stock Option Plan was amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
  
 “AUTOMATIC AWARDS TO NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
  
 Each non-employee director of the Company and each non-employee director of
any subsidiary of the Company designated by the Committee will receive an automatic Award of NQSOs following the first annual meeting of the shareholders of the Company that is held after such director is elected to be a member of the Company’s
board of directors and/or a member of the board of directors of a subsidiary of the Company designated by the Committee. Currently, the only subsidiary designated for participation in the Plan is Heritage Bank & Trust. The amount of shares
covered by each automatic Award will be determined in the sole discretion of the Committee. The exercise price of the non-employee director automatic Awards will be 120% of the fair market value of the shares on the Award date. Unless the Committee
determines otherwise, each such Award will become vested and exercisable on the third anniversary of the Award date, and each such Award will be forfeited to the extent it is not vested and exercisable if the director to which awarded resigns, fails
to be reelected as a director, dies or becomes disabled. Except as otherwise described in this section, automatic Awards to non-employee directors are generally subject to the same terms and conditions as other Awards under the Plan.”

  

									
	 /s/    Stephen A. Johnsen

	 	 	 	 Dated:
	 	 January 22, 2004


	Stephen A. Johnsen, Secretary
**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 Performance Health Technologies, Inc.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, James E. Bartolomei, 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:





1)           The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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:  November
                27,
                2007
            By:
            /s/ James
              E. BartolomeiJames
              E. BartolomeiChief
                Financial Officer(Principal
                Financial Officer)
ET&T LICENSING AGREEMENT

This Agreement states that Electronic Transactions & Technologies (ET&T)
does hereby license the following ET&T products to Betting, Inc., a Missouri
corporation, for the exclusive global usage of wagering by PERFECT originated
ATM cards, credit cards, and smart cards:

The PayMaster, defined as a stand alone terminal that attaches to phone lines
and which calls the ET&T host processing center with bank data.

The SLICK, defined as a stand alone keyboard terminall that attaches to phone
lines and call the ET&T host processing center with bank data that has
bypassed the Internet.

The PocketPay, defined as a pocket sized terminal and telephone that sends
bank data by wireless transmission to the ET&T host processing center.

The TV Pin Pad Remote, defined as a set top box and TV remote that sends bank
data by landline dial up transmission to the ET&T host processing center.

EAch ET&T procudt is exclusively licensed to Betting, Inc. on a global basis
for the application of PERFECT wagering at a licensing fee of $2,000,000 each.

The duration of the exclusive license is 20 years.

				Electronic Transactions & Technologies



Dated: March 27, 1998		By:_/s/  Thomas S. Hughes__
					Thomas S, Hughes, Chariman & CEO




					Betting, Inc.



Dated: March 27, 1998		By:/s/_Thomas S. Hughes__
					Thomas S. Hughes, Chariman & CEO
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

THE DAILY WIRE, LLC et al., 

 Plaintiffs 

v. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF STATE et al., 

 Defendants. 

 Civil Action No. 6:23-cv-00609 (JDK) 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

 Please take notice that Senior Trial Counsel Joshua Kolsky hereby enters his appearance on 

behalf of Defendants in this matter. 

Date: July 30, 2024 

 Respectfully submitted, 

_/s/ Joshua M. Kolsky____________ 

JOSHUA KOLSKY 

Senior Trial Counsel 

United States Department of Justice 

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 

1100 L Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20005 

Tel: (202) 305-7664 

Email: joshua.kolsky@usdoj.gov 

Counsel for Defendants 

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 70 Filed 07/30/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2121
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on July 30, 2024, a true and correct copy of this document was served 

electronically by the Court’s CM/ECF system to all counsel of record. 

 __/s/ Joshua Kolsky__ 

 Joshua Kolsky 

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 70 Filed 07/30/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2122