alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
lob-ex102_68.htm



Exhibit 10.2

 

AMENDMENT TO THE 
LIVE OAK BANCHSARES, INC. 
NONSTATUTORY STOCK OPTION PLAN

 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) deems it to be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to amend the Company’s Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”) in order to expand the permitted means of payment for the exercise of stock options issued under the NSO Plan to include payment through (i) a broker-dealer sale and remittance procedure and (ii) a “net exercise”.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan shall be amended as follows.

 

1.Section 7 of the Plan shall be deleted in its entirety and the following substituted in lieu thereof:

 

“7.Payment of Option Price.  Subject to the applicable laws, payment for shares subject to an Option may be made (a) in cash, (b) in issued and outstanding shares of Common Stock, (c) through a broker-dealer sale and remittance procedure pursuant to which the optionee (i) shall provide written instructions to a Company designated brokerage firm to effect the immediate sale of some or all of the purchased shares and remit to the Company sufficient funds to cover the aggregate exercise price payable for the purchased shares and (ii) shall provide written directives to the Company to deliver the certificates (or other evidence satisfactory to the Company to the extent that the shares are uncertificated) for the purchased shares directly to such brokerage firm in order to complete the sale transaction; or (d) through a “net exercise” such that, without the payment of any funds, the optionee may exercise the Option and receive the net number of shares equal to (i) the number of shares as to which the Option is being exercised, multiplied by (ii) a fraction, the numerator of which is the fair market value per share on such date less the Option Price, and the denominator of which is such fair market value per share on such date.”

 

2.Except as herein amended, the terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect as originally adopted and approved, as amended to date.
SAWYERS v. FARM BUREAU INSURANCE.

No. 264A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2005.

C. Grainger Pierce, Jr., Charlotte, for Farm Bureau Insurance.

Robert S. Adden, Jr., Charlotte, for Michelle L. Sawyers.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th day of June 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Farm Bureau Insurance) shall have up to and including the 18th day of July 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 8th day of June 2005."
STATE of North Carolina v. Dwight PARKER, Sr.

No. 306P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2005.

Dwight Parker, Sr., Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Clark Everett, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 21st day of June 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Pitt County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2005."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      44,830,487
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,343,916
<ALLOWANCES>                                    89,724
<INVENTORY>                                    601,020
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,696,163
<PP&E>                                         834,568
<DEPRECIATION>                                  89,820
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,531,420
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,715,989
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    50,786,781
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,531,420
<SALES>                                     15,021,060
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,021,060
<CGS>                                       10,198,971
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,198,971
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,126,361
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             191,724
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,112,548)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,304,272)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,112,548)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.31)


</TABLE>
22 Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018

 Data sources: DoD’s Defense Manpower Data Center; DoD’s Procurement and Acquisition Policy; DoD’s Military Installations, Ranges and Training Areas; USASpending.gov; U.S. Bureau of Economic 

Analysis; U.S. Census Bureau; and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions, B = billions) 

Raytheon $6.7 B

Boeing $2.0 B

Honeywell $1.1 B

Northrop Grumman $681.2 M

Patriarch Partners $218.3 M

General Dynamics $213.0 M

Nammo $133.1 M

Trax International $99.0 M

Insight Enterprises $91.9 M

Advanced Turbine Engine $73.9 M

Contract Awards Performed (by fiscal year, billions)

ARIZONA

#10 #11 3.0% $2,122 #10 #20 #21

$15.2 B SPENT

IN STATE

4.3% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER RESIDENT $13.2 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

43,196 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$2.0 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$2.0 BILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

43,196

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Maricopa 4,800 2,375 3,456 5,056 15,687

Pima 5,965 2,735 2,662 2,044 13,406

Cochise 3,805 2,703 47 179 6,734

Yuma 3,663 1,260 61 37 5,021

Pinal ND 209 763 12

Coconino 19 44 400 ND

Yavapai 12 ND 194 ND

Navajo ND ND 42 ND

Graham ND ND 38 ND

Apache ND ND ND ND

Construction: 1%

Research and 

Development: 6%

Service: 14%

Supplies and 

Equipment: 78%

Active Duty: 44%

Civilian: 22%

National 

Guard: 18%

Reserve: 17%

40%

24%

16%

21%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

39%

16%

43%

3%

$12.4 $12.5

$10.7

$8.6

$6.3

$8.9 $9.7

$13.2

FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND
Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018 23

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

(M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions)

Coconino Apache

Yavapai

La Paz

Maricopa

Yuma Pinal

Cochise

Santa Cruz

FISCAL YEAR 2018 ARIZONA

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (K = thousands, M = millions, B = billions) (M=millions) (M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

Pima

Maricopa

Cochise

Yuma

Pinal

Santa Cruz

Yavapai

Coconino

La Paz

Apache

(K = thousands, M = millions)

$7.0 B

$5.1 B

$823.9 M

$243.4 M

$41.3 M

$36.8 M

$15.4 M

$6.4 M

$4.9 M

$684.3 K

Navajo

Graham

Pima

Maricopa

Cochise

Yuma

Pinal

Coconino

Yavapai

Navajo

Graham

Apache

$660.9 M

$641.9 M

$415.7 M

$234.5 M

$23.1 M

$11.4 M

$4.7 M

$645.7 K

$367.9 K

$114.3 K

Apache

Pima

Yuma

Coconino Apache

Yavapai

La Paz

Maricopa

Yuma Pinal

Cochise

Santa Cruz

Pima

Coconino

Yavapai

Maricopa

Pinal

Cochise

Santa Cruz

Pima
HOOD v. HUNT.

No. 403P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of NC.

*507The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd day of August 2005 by Plaintiff To Proceed as Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 18th day of August 2005."
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 on Form 10-Q of Bimini Capital Management,
Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, G.
Hunter Haas, IV, President, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of the Company, 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), as applicable, 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
      as of, and for, the periods presented in the
  Report.





August
      10, 2009
            /s/
      G. Hunter HaasG.
      Hunter Haas, IV
              President,
      Chief Investment Officer,
              Chief
      Financial Officer and Treasurer
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

PHARMACOPEIA DRUG DISCOVERY, INC.

 

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmacopeia Drug Discovery, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Michio Soga, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of theCompany, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| By:    | /s/ Michio Soga                |   |
|--------|--------------------------------|--------|
|   | Michio Soga                    |
|   | Executive Vice  President and  |
|   | Chief Financial Officer        |
|   | (Principal Financial  Officer) |

 

November4, 2005

 

----
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                          I, SEAN FROATS, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AEC 1, Inc. (the
"REGISTRANT");

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I am responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "EVALUATION DATE"); and

(c) Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our required evaluation as of
the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

                                BY: /S/ SEAN FROATS
                                ----------------------------------
                                SEAN FROATS
                                PRESIDENT AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Date: August 19, 2005
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. AP-76,394, AP-76,395 & AP-76,396

EX PARTE LLEWELLYN SCOTT, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 16193 IN THE 329 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM WHARTON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex

parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts

of possession of a controlled substance and one count of tampering with evidence and sentenced to

seventy-five years’ imprisonment for each count. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his

conviction. Scott v. State, No. 13-08-315-CR (Tex. App–Corpus Christi, August 17, 2009). 

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel

failed to timely notify Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed. We remanded this
2

application to the trial court for findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. Based on that affidavit, the trial court

has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that appellate counsel failed to timely notify

Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed. The trial court recommends that relief be granted.

Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We find, therefore, that Applicant is

entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of

the Thirteenth Court of Appeals in Cause No. 13-08-315-CR that affirmed his conviction in Case

No. 16193 from the 329 Judicial District Court of WhartonCounty. Applicant shall file his petition th

for discretionary review with the Thirteenth Court of Appeals within 30 days of the date on which

this Court’s mandate issues.

Delivered: August 25, 2010

Do not publish
STATE v. OCHOA

No. COA04-939

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 3, 2005.

Certification Date May 23, 2005.

Appeal from the Randolph (03CRS50140).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. TINDALL.

No. COA04-1284.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed September 6, 2005.

Certification September 26, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. No error in part, reversed in part.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Steven M. Van Dick, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Hansen Medical, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.August 14, 2007   /s/ Steven M. Van Dick   Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
----

----

|   | (1) | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Registrants. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      August 12, 2009 |    | By     | :      | /s/      WILLIAM S. MORRIS IV                         |
|----------------------------|--------------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |    |   |   | William      S. Morris IVChief      Executive Officer |

| Date:      August 12, 2009 |         | By     | :      | /s/      STEVE K. STONE                        |
|----------------------------|--------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------|
|                       |    |   |   | Steve      K. StoneChief      FinancialOfficer |
McNAIR v. SUPERIOR CONST. CO., INC.

No. COA04-1048.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed April 5, 2005.

Certification Date April 25, 2005.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. #248030).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. OVERTON

No. COA04-327

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 3, 2005.

Certification Date May 23, 2005.

Appeal from the Hertford (03CRS50202).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                    18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely  for the purposes of complying with, and the extent required by 18 U.S.C.
1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned  certifies,  in  his  capacity  as  the  Chief  Executive Officer of
Integral  Technologies,  Inc.,  that, to his knowledge, the annual report of the
company  on  Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, fully complies with
the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934  and  that  the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all
material  respects, the company's financial condition and results of operations.


October 4, 2004


/s/ William S. Robinson
--------------------------------------------
William S. Robinson, Chief Executive Officer


<PAGE>