alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1


 


First Amendment to Consulting Agreement


 


This First Amendment to Consulting Agreement
is entered into as of May 1, 2013, by and among TNP Strategic Retail Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “REIT”),
TNP Strategic Retail Operating Partnership, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership” and together
with the REIT, the “Company”) and Glenborough, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Consultant”).


 


Whereas the Company and the Consultant entered into that certain
Consulting Agreement dated as of December 14, 2012; and


 


Whereas the Company and the Consultant now wish to amend the
Consulting Agreement;


 


Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, of the mutual
promises contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,
the parties hereto agree to amend the Consulting Agreement as follows:


 


		1.	Exhibit A is hereby amended to add the following:



 


Consultant shall provide the following accounting services to
the REIT and its subsidiaries as of the date of this Agreement:


 


		o	All A/R functions including property rent and cam billings and all REIT level A/R



 


		o	All A/P functions



 


Effective June 1, 2013, Consultant shall provide the following
additional accounting services to the REIT and its subsidiaries:


 


Corporate level receivables and payables


 


		o	Loan Administration



 


		o	Cash management and treasury functions



 


		o	Work with outside auditors and attorneys to handle required SEC financial reporting



 


		o	Management reporting



 


		o	Audit coordination



 


		o	Tax prep coordination.



 


The following are not included in the services outlined above
and are to be completed by the REIT’s current CFO and accounting group:


 


		·	Completion and filing of Q1 10-Q



 






    	 



    	 



    

 


		·	Assist GLB with closing out accounting for the month of April, 2013 on or before May 20, 2013



 


		·	Transfer of April closing balances to Consultant



 


		·	Assist in transition as reasonably requested by Consultant



 


		·	Assist in data conversion as reasonably requested by Consultant



 


		·	Assist in Q2 SEC filing(s) as reasonably requested by Consultant



  


		2.	The monthly Consulting Fee is hereby increased by $15,000, with such increase allocable to the additional services referenced
in Section 1 above.



  


		3.	Except as specifically set forth herein, the Consulting Agreement shall remain unchanged, and in full force and effect.



  


	TNP Strategic Retail Trust, Inc.	 	TNP Strategic Retail Operating Partnership, L.P.
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	TNP Strategic Retail Trust, Inc.
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	Its General Partner
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Jeffrey Rogers	 	 	/s/ Jeffrey Rogers
	 	 	 	 
	Jeffrey Rogers, Board Member	 	 	Jeffrey Rogers, Board Member


  


	Glenborough, LLC
	 	 
	By:	/s/ Andrew Batinovich
	 	 
	 	Andrew Batinovich, President
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.’s 333-76692, 333-77690,333-76688, 333-32854 and 333-41394) pertaining to the eGain Communications Corporation 2000 Non-Management Stock Option Plan, the eGain Communications Corporation Amended and Restated 1998 Stock Plan, the Social Science, Inc. 1997 Stock Option Plan,the Big Science Corporation 1999 Stock Incentive Plan, the eGain Communications Corporation 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Amended and Restated Inference Corporation 1993 Stock Option Plan, the Inference Corporation 1998 Non-Management StockOption Plan, the Inference Corporation 1998 New Hire Stock Option Plan, the Inference Corporation Charles W. Jepson Stock Option Plan, the Inference Corporation Private Placement Stock Option Plan, the Inference Corporation Fourth Amended andRestated Incentive Stock Option Plan and Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and (Form S-3 No. 333-48314) pertaining to 22,373,370 Shares of Common Stock and the related Prospectus of our report dated August 8, 2003 with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements and schedule of eGain Communications for the year ended June, 2003, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended June 30, 2005. 

 

/s/    Ernst & Young LLP 

 

Palo Alto, California 

September 23, 2005
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION of CEO and CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350, SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

In connection with the annual report of the Intrepid
(Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Commission on the date hereof, William Dunavant, Chief Executive officer and
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting 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 2003, that:

(1) This 10-KSB complies with the
requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act; and

(2) The financial information contained
in this Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/ William DunavantBy: William Dunavant, Chief
Executive Officer

/s/ William DunavantBy: William Dunavant, Chief
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

April 15, 2008

The signed original of this written statement required by
section 906 has been provided to Intrepid Global Imaging 3D Inc., and will be
retained by Intrepid Global Imaging 3D Inc and furnished to the SEC upon
request.

---
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

ZACHARY ALLEN CRANDALL , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 1

- 0112

[ July 22, 2021 ]

Appeal from the C ounty Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County ; Daryl J. Isenhower

, Judge; L.T. Case No s

. 56201 9MM002789 and 562020AP000023

.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender

, and Alan T. Lipson

, Assistant Public Defender

, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Zachary Allen Crandall, Fort Pierce

, appellant.

No appearance f iled for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

L EVINE , F ORST and A RTAU , JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
In the MATTER OF Atiya Shawtel JOHNSON, Respondent

Appellate Case No. 2019-000101

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

January 29, 2019

**557ORDER

Respondent, a municipal court judge in Hardeeville and Ridgeland and a ministerial recorder/clerk of court in Hardeeville, was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury on four counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2) (making any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the Government of the United States). The Office of Disciplinary Counsel has filed a petition asking the Court to place Respondent on interim suspension pursuant to Rule 17(a), RJDE, Rule 502, SCACR.

IT IS ORDERED that the petition is granted and Respondent is placed on interim suspension in regard to her judicial positions. Additionally, as the administrative head of the unified judicial system and pursuant to article V, section 4 of the South Carolina Constitution, Respondent is suspended from her position as ministerial recorder/clerk of court. The municipalities of Hardeeville and Ridgeland are under no obligation to pay Respondent her salary during her suspensions. *See**In re Ferguson* , 304 S.C. 216, 219, 403 S.E.2d 628, 631 (1991) ("[A] public officer who is suspended from office is not entitled **558to compensation."). Respondent is enjoined from access to any monies, bank accounts, and records related to her judicial and municipal offices. Chief Municipal Judge Nancy Gutierrez is hereby appointed to take charge of all such monies, bank accounts, and records for Hardeeville. Chief Municipal Judge Thomas L. Scoggins is hereby appointed to take charge of all such monies, bank accounts, and records for Ridgeland.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is prohibited from entering the premises of the municipal courts of Hardeeville and Ridgeland unless escorted by a law enforcement officer after authorization from the Chief Municipal Judges of Hardeeville or Ridgeland. Finally, Respondent is prohibited from having access to, destroying, or canceling any public records and is prohibited from access to any judicial databases or case management systems. This Order authorizes the appropriate government or law enforcement official to implement any of the prohibitions as stated in this Order.

*474This Order, when served on any bank or other financial institution maintaining any judicial accounts of Respondent, shall serve as notice to the institution that Respondent is enjoined from having access to or making withdrawals from the accounts.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty*, C. J.

FOR THE COURT
[— NYS2d —]

#### Mattie A. Robinson, Respondent, v Carrie C. Ross, Defendant, and Arthur Morrison, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

March 31, 1993

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Arthur Morrison,*Scarsdale, appellant *pro se. Julian & Schlesinger, P. C.,*New York City *(Ira M. Newman, David B. Turret*and *Mary Elizabeth Bums*of counsel), for respondent.

*64OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment unanimously modified by vacating the award in favor of plaintiff against Arthur Morrison and, as so modified, affirmed without costs.

 The plaintiff commenced the instant small claims action against defendant to recover for property damage sustained to her vehicle as a result of a collision which occurred between her vehicle and the defendant’s vehicle. The defendant interposed an answer wherein she denied any liability and counterclaimed for damages to her vehicle. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment and the motion was granted resulting in the aforesaid judgment being entered in plaintiff’s favor. The lower court also awarded plaintiff costs against defendant’s attorney (the appellant) pursuant to CPLR 8303-a. On appeal, Arthur Morrison raises issues concerning the award in favor of plaintiff as against defendant. However, he has no standing to raise said issues and no appeal has been taken by defendant. With respect to his contentions concerning the award pursuant to CPLR 8303-a, there is no indication that he acted in bad faith and therefore the lower court erred in awarding judgment as against him.

DiPaola, P. J., Stark and Collins, JJ., concur.
#### Mary J. Burke, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Defendants, and Eugene Hurkin, Respondent.

[720 NYS2d 25]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered on or about November 4, 1999, which granted the motion of defendant Eugene Hurkin for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims as against him, and order, same court and Justice, entered August 2, 2000, which, to the extent appealable, denied plaintiffs motion for renewal, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant Hurkin’s vehicle was stolen and thereafter became involved in a series of collisions resulting in plaintiffs injury. Although plaintiff maintains otherwise, it is plain that, at the time of its theft, there was an able-bodied adult within the Hurkin vehicle and, accordingly, the vehicle had not been left unattended within the meaning of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1210 (a) *(see, Matter of Hartford Ins. Co. [Aquaviva],*179 AD2d 546). Plaintiffs alternative claim that defendant Hurkin may be held liable under a common-law negligence theory must also fail, since, at common law, the owner of a stolen vehicle is not liable for the negligence of its thief *(American Tr. Ins. Co. v Baez,*278 AD2d 45). Renewal was properly denied since the purportedly new material offered in support of plaintiffs motion was available at the time of the original motion and, in any event, does not warrant a different disposition. Concur— Williams, J. P., Andrias, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1









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 Ply Gem Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the quarterly period ended July 3, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I 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, in all material respects, 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 Company.




Date:  August 6, 2010
/s/ Gary E. Robinette

Gary E. Robinette

President and Chief Executive Officer

Ply Gem Holdings, Inc.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      13,270,784
<SECURITIES>                                 6,888,741
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,241,826
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,192,818
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,042,594
<PP&E>                                      53,891,510
<DEPRECIATION>                              30,932,406
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             128,461,545
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       22,796,482
<BONDS>                                    100,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 23,975,000
<COMMON>                                        75,105
<OTHER-SE>                                (21,348,170)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               128,461,545
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            64,366,037
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               62,321,505
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                73,821
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          12,750,540
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,652,440)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (9,182,183)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (10,062,831)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,062,831)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### STATE ex rel. Nathaniel LAMBERT v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-2119.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Lambert, Nathaniel;—Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 387-752; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002 K 347.

Denied.
Order entered September 30, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00121-CR

TORREY LADARIUS GRAY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F19-76009-Q

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s September 28, 2021 motion to extend time to 

file his brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief filed by October 27, 

2021.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
STATE of North Carolina v. Christopher Jamme WHITFIELD and State of North Carolina v. Corey Levi Banner

No. 282P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 30, 2019

Jillian C. Katz, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Whitfield, Christopher Jamme

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender

Leslie C. Rawls, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Corey Levi Banner, for Banner, Corey Levi

Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, L. Michael Dodd, Special Deputy Attorney General, Roxann L. Vaneekhoven, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of September 2018 by Defendant (Corey Levi Banner) 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 *635and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of January 2019."
**Exhibit32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jackson Hewitt Tax ServiceInc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2005,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Michael D. Lister, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ MICHAEL D. LISTER                 |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Michael D. Lister                     |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
| March 16, 2005                   |

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

MICHAEL STEVEN WRIGHT, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-10062 

D.C. No. 

1:15-cr-00171-DKW-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Hawaii

Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted June 16, 2017

Honolulu, Hawaii

Before: FISHER, PAEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Michael Wright appeals the district court’s sentence following his guilty 

plea for possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 

21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we

affirm.

1. The record does not support Wright’s argument that the district court 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

JUN 29 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

plainly erred by holding him responsible for the conduct of another. Wright 

personally possessed with intent to distribute the package containing 

methamphetamine, and therefore the district court’s use of methamphetamine to set 

Wright’s guideline range merely held him responsible for his own conduct. See 

U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1) (defining scope of relevant conduct for which a defendant 

may be held responsible); see also United States v. Salazar, 5 F.3d 445, 446 (9th 

Cir. 1993) (finding a defendant who helped to import drugs personally responsible 

for the type and quantity of drugs actually imported, even when he claimed that he 

had been misled as to drug type). 

2. The district court correctly used methamphetamine (instead of 

marijuana) to calculate Wright’s sentencing guideline range, despite the fact that 

Wright thought the package contained marijuana. Unlike drug type and quantity, a 

defendant’s knowledge of drug type and quantity is not a fact that must be admitted 

or proved beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Jefferson, 791 F.3d 1013, 

1019 (9th Cir. 2015); see also United States v. Soto-Zuniga, 837 F.3d 992, 1004–

05 (9th Cir. 2016).

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                                 DIRECTRIX, INC.
                         SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                          FOR YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2000

This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Form
10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2000 of Directrix, Inc.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001067310
<NAME>                        Directrix, Inc.
<CURRENCY>                                     $

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         324,000
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  825,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   370,000
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,236,000
<PP&E>                                         12,409,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 7,268,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,154,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,299,000
<BONDS>                                        1,913,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       22,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     20,833,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,154,000
<SALES>                                        8,796,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               8,796,000
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  15,061,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             168,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,064,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,064,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,064,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (2.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (2.86)



</TABLE>