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

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.23

                  THIRD AMENDMENT TO DEALERTRACK HOLDINGS, INC.

                             2001 STOCK OPTION PLAN

            1. Definitions. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise
defined shall have the meanings set forth in the DealerTrack Holdings, Inc. 2001
Stock Option Plan, as amended (the "Plan").

            2. Shares of Stock Subject to the Plan. Section 3(a) of the Plan is
hereby amended by replacing the number of shares of Common Stock subject to the
Plan in the first sentence of such Section 3(a) from "2, 100,000" to
"3,300,000".
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Frederick C. Flynn, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of CUNO Incorporated;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;
b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructionscontained in SEC Release 31-47986]
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting.
Date: December 22, 2004    /s/ Frederick C. Flynn, Jr.   Frederick C. Flynn, Jr. Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
# C_2017157EN.01002101.xml

| 19.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 157/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 157/21

---

Corrigendum to the Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2016 — amending budget No 1

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 84 of 17 March 2017
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 84 of 17 March 2017

(2017/C 157/13)

On page 12:

| (1) | in Chapter 1 0 ‘European Union subsidy’: |
| --- | --- |

(1)

in Chapter 1 0 ‘European Union subsidy’:

in the column ‘Amending budget No 1’:

for:

for:

‘300 000’,

read:

read:

‘160 000’.

in the column ‘New amount’:

for:

for:

‘20 671 000’,

read:

read:

‘20 531 000’.

| (2) | in Chapter 5 4 ‘Miscellaneous revenue available for reuse but not used’: |
| --- | --- |

(2)

in Chapter 5 4 ‘Miscellaneous revenue available for reuse but not used’:

in the columns ‘Amending budget No 1’ and ‘New amount’:

for:

for:

‘9 137’,

read:

read:

‘9 136’.

| (3) | in the ‘Grand total’ row: |
| --- | --- |

(3)

in the ‘Grand total’ row:

in the column ‘Amending budget No 1’:

for:

for:

‘369 501’,

read:

read:

‘229 500’;

in the column ‘New amount’:

for:

for:

‘20 929 501’,

read:

read:

‘20 789 500’.

---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

 

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.ss.1350

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 (the Form****10-Q) of Citizens Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (the “Company”), I, Ronald E. Baron, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,****hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the**Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

|   | (a) | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | (b) | the information contained in the Form 10-Q 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 Form l0-Q. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | /s/ Ronald E. Baron     |   | Date: May 14, 2008 |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------------------|
|   | Ronald E. Baron         |   |               |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |   |               |
STATE v. FOWLER

No. COA05-435.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed November 15, 2005.

Certification Date December 5, 2005

Appeal from the Wake (03CRS51209).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2373

ESPERANZA GUERRERO,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

and

JUAN GUERRERO; JJG, Minor; MG, Minor; JG, Minor; MARIA 

MUNGUIA; KG, Minor,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DAVID L. MOORE, in his official and individual capacity,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

CHARLIE T. DEANE, in his official capacity; LUIS POTES, in 

his official and individual capacity; ADAM HURLEY, in his 

official and individual capacity; DOES 1-6, in their 

official and individual capacities; ROES 1-5, in their 

official and individual capacities; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY 

POLICE DEPARTMENT; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY; MATTHEW CAPLAN, in 

his official and individual capacity; KAREN MUELHAUSER, in 

her official and individual capacity; DOES 1-5, in their 

official and individual capacities,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior

District Judge. (1:09-cv-01313-JCC-TRJ)
2

Submitted: March 21, 2013 Decided: April 2, 2013

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Esperanza Guerrero, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Notz, Mary Alice 

Rowan, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Prince William, Virginia, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Esperanza Guerrero appeals the district court’s 

summary judgment order disposing of all but one of her various 

claims, and challenges the sufficiency of the evidence

supporting the jury’s verdict for Defendant Moore on that

remaining claim. As for the claims disposed of on summary 

judgment, this court reviews the district court’s summary 

judgment order de novo, viewing the facts and reasonable 

inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. 

Bonds v. Leavitt, 629 F.3d 369, 380 (4th Cir. 2011). Summary 

judgment is appropriate where the movant shows that there is no 

genuine issue of material fact and that it is entitled to 

judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). We have 

reviewed the record and find no error on the part of the 

district court. As for the claim decided by the jury, this 

court is without authority to review the sufficiency of the 

evidence supporting the jury’s verdict, in light of Guerrero’s 

failure to raise an appropriate post-verdict motion in the 

district court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50, 59. Unitherm 

Food Sys., Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., 546 U.S. 394, 404 

(2006); A Helping Hand, LLC v. Balt. Cnty., 515 F.3d 356, 369-70 

(4th Cir. 2008). 

Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, and affirm both the district court’s order and the 
4

jury’s verdict. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### 172 Audubon Corp., Appellant, v 1018 Morris Park Avenue Realty, Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[804 NYS2d 285]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered June 14, 2004, which, upon the prior grant of defendants-respondents’ motion for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered May 14, 2004, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.

As we have already had occasion to observe in this matter, “the unambiguous terms of the parties’ contract, as amended by the agreement of August 16, 2002, rescinded the fifth paragraph of the Additional Rider and provided that the buyer would ‘tak[e] subject to the existing C/O’ and that ‘no representation as to the legality of the structure’ had been made by the sellers. The amendment further provided that the remaining terms of the contract of sale, which included a paragraph that no provision of the contract could be ‘waived, changed or cancelled except in writing,’ remained unchanged” (3 AD3d 451, 452-453 [2004]). Therefore, there was no contractual basis for plaintiffs insistence at the adjourned closing, on September 6, 2002, for assurances that the C/Os legalized the 10 existing residential tenancies and, indeed, plaintiff breached the contract by refusing to close in the absence of such assurances. The sellers were under no duty to offer continued performance once plaintiff had breached the contract, particularly since there had been no further adjournment of the closing date, which pursuant to the contract had been scheduled for June 26, 2002. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Sullivan, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5362 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5362

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on porcelain lamp-holder 
                      housings containing sockets.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 12, 2008

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on porcelain lamp-holder 
                      housings containing sockets.

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

SECTION 1. PORCELAIN LAMP-HOLDER HOUSINGS CONTAINING SOCKETS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.30 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to lamp-holder housings of 
porcelain, containing sockets) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' 
and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (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>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7815

WAYNE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

versus

SARA E. FLANNERY, Administrative Agent;

RICHARD L. WILLIAMS, Administrative Minister;

YOUNGBLOOD, DEA Agent; WILLIAM B. ENGLAND,

Drug Investigator; LARRY A. LOVELESS, Drug

Task Force; RANDY BELYEN, U.S. Marshall; JOHN

WALSH, DEA; LISA D. SOMER, DEA; ROBERT

VALENTINE, DEA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District

Judge. (CA-02-294-3)

Submitted: February 6, 2003 Decided: February 13, 2003

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint, which the court

properly construed as an action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named

Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v.

Flannery, No. CA-02-294-3 (E.D. Va. Oct. 18, 2002). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5407 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5407

     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain wooden wall plates.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2008

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain wooden wall plates.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN WOODEN WALL PLATES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00       Residential grade   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''.
                          toggle and duplex                                                  31/2011.......
                          wallplates of
                          wood (provided
                          for in subheading
                          4421.90.97)......

    (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>
```
STATE v. PRICE.

No. COA04-366.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed March 15, 2005.

Certification Date April 4, 2005.

Appeal from the New Hanover (03CRS1503).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
42 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021

IDAHO 

#47

$0.7 B SPENT IN 

STATE 

#49

0.7% OF STATE GDP

0.1%

OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING 

$356

PER RESIDENT 

#50

$0.2 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING 

#44

10,753 NUMBER OF 

PERSONNEL 

#44

$0.5 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Research and

Construction: 2% Development: 6%

Supplies and

Equipment: 45%

Service: 46%

By Service 

Army

7%

Navy/Marines

15%

Air Force

44%

Other Defense

34%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Reserve: 8%

Active Duty: 34%

National 

Guard: 43%

Civilian: 16%

Top Defense Personnel Locations

Allocations, By Service 

Army

44%

Navy/Marines

3%

Air Force

52%

Other Defense

0%

Top Defense Contractors 

Brad Hall & Associates

PKL Services

Bering Sea Environmental LLC

Lightforce

Tanadgusix Corp.

AERO Specialties

Milpower

Northcon, Inc.

General Dynamics

Power Engineers

(M = millions)

$45.3 M

$12.8 M

$10.0 M

$9.1 M

$8.6 M

$8.0 M

$7.3 M

$6.9 M

$6.4 M

$6.0 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$0.3

$0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2

FY18 FY19 FY20

$0.2 $0.2

FY14 FY15

$0.1

FY16 FY17 FY21

$470.0 MILLION 10,753

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

County

Ada

Elmore

Kootenai

Bannock

Canyon

Twin Falls

Bonneville

Jerome

Clearwater

Cassia

Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

75 971 2,856

3,455 467 214 

0 73 206

ND 11 224 

ND ND 258 

ND ND 92 

21 17 105 

0 ND 128 

16 55 22 

0 0 77 

Reserve

559 

30 

90 

113 

0 

65

0 

0 

0 

0 

Total

4,461

4,166

369

ND 

ND 

ND 

143 

ND 

93 

77 
FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

(M=millions)

(M=millions) (M=millions)

IDAHO 

FISCAL YEAR 2021 

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

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

Elmore

Bonneville

Ada

Kootenai

Clearwater

Canyon

Blaine

Bingham

Bannock

Latah

(M = millions)

$76.3 M

$50.1 M

$35.5 M

$10.2 M

$10.1 M

$7.2 M

$6.4 M

$5.9 M

$1.3 M

$567.6 K

Elmore

Ada

Kootenai

Bannock

Canyon

Clearwater

Bonneville

Twin Falls

Bonner

Latah

$248.1 M

$158.3 M

$12.3 M

$8.4 M

$7.2 M

$5.7 M

$5.6 M

$3.5 M

$3.5 M

$3.0 M 

Clearwater

KootenaiKootenai

Elmore

Canyon

Ada

Blaine

Bonneville

Bannock

Bingham

Latah

Kootenai

Latah Clearwater

Bonner

Elmore

Canyon

Ada

Twin Falls

Bonneville

Bannock

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021 43

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS
Second Amendment to the Assignment of License Agreement dated July 21, 2005


 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF LICENSE AGREEMENT 
  
 THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF LICENSE AGREEMENT (“Second Amendment”) is entered into July 21, 2005 (“Effective
Date”) by and between Blast Energy Services, Inc. (formerly known as Verdisys, Inc.), a California corporation (“Blast”) and Maxim TEP, Inc., a Texas Corporation (“Maxim”). 
  
 WHEREAS on March 8, 2005, Blast and Maxim entered into an assignment of license agreement
requiring payments to be made in accordance with a defined payment schedule; 
  
 WHEREAS Maxim has failed to pay Three Hundred Thousand ($300,000) Dollars of the total balance due on June 3, 2005 and has failed to cure the default within the defined 45 day cure period; 
  
 WHEREAS Maxim has requested an extended period to pay the additional consideration due;

  
 THEREFORE, in view of the good and valuable consideration stated below, Blast
and Maxim agree as follows: 
  
 1. Extension Period. 
  
 1.1 Blast agrees to extend the period that Maxim has to pay the additional
Three Hundred Thousand ($300,000) Dollars of the balance due to July 25, 2005. Consequently Maxim will pay Four Hundred Thousand ($400,000) Dollars on July 25, 2005 in total. This extension is a one time extension and is not subject to any grace or
cure periods. Failure to pay by the Four Hundred Thousand ($400,000) Dollars on July 25, 2005 will result in the lapse of the assignment and forfeiture of all prior consideration. 
  
 2. Consideration. 
  
 2.1 In consideration of this Extension, Maxim shall pay a delinquency fee of Twenty Five Thousand ($25,000) Dollars by wire on July 21, 2005. 

 
 All other terms of the Assignment of License Agreement and the First
Amendment are unchanged and remain in full force and effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	MAXIM TEP, INC.	 	 
		
	 /s/ Robert Sepos, CFO

	 	 7/21/2005


	Robert Sepos, Chief Financial Officer	 	Date
		
	BLAST ENERGY SERVICES, INC.	 	 
		
	 /s/ David M. Adams

	 	 July 21, 2005


	David Adams, President & Co-CEO	 	Date
STATE of North Carolina v. Robin Medford JONES.

No. 435P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 3, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Ronald L. Moore, for State.

Reita P. Pendry, for Jones.

*AMENDED ORDER*

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 30th day of October 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of November 2005."
Exhibit 32.1



QUADRAMED CORPORATION

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



In connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K of QuadraMed Corporation for the period ended December 31, 2004, I, Lawrence P. English, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of QuadraMed Corporation,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my best knowledge:



1. This Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 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 this Form 10-K for the period end December 31,
2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of QuadraMed Corporation.



|                     |  |                                                         
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 16, 2005 |  | /s/    Lawrence P. English                              
|                     |  | Lawrence P. English Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
STATE of NC v. KING.

No. 581P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 4, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th day of November 2004 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 4th day of May 2005."