alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, N. Michael Dion, Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of Pinnacle Foods Group Inc.(the “Registrant”), certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Pinnacle Foods Group Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 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 ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; 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 quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theRegistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.     Date: November 8, 2005         /s/ N. MICHAEL DION N. Michael Dion    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

E.G., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, MARGARET L. 

SELLERS PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION 

CENTER, San Diego, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0203

Issued: December 17, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On November 19, 2020 appellant filed an appeal from a May 20, 2020 merit decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 21-0203.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the May 20, 2020 decision was November 16, 2020. As appellant 

did not file an appeal with the Board until November 19, 2020, more than 180 days after the

May 20, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 21-0203 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

a reason to explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0203 is dismissed.

Issued: December 17, 2020

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
**Exhibit 10.13**

**Maxygen, Inc.**

**Summary of Non-Employee DirectorCompensation**

**(effective March 9, 2010)**

*Annual Retainer & Meeting Fees*

Each non-employee member of theBoard of Directors (“Board”) of Maxygen, Inc. (the “Company”) will receive (i) an annual retainer fee of $40,000; (ii) an annual retainer fee of $20,000 for service as chairperson of the Audit Committee of the Board, ifapplicable; (iii) an annual retainer fee of $15,000 for service as chairperson of any committee of the Board other than the Audit Committee, if applicable; (iv) an annual retainer fee of $5,000 for service as a member (but not thechairperson) of any committee of the Board, if and as applicable; (v) a meeting fee of $5,000 per meeting of the Board; (vi) a meeting fee of $1,000 per special or telephonic meeting of the Board of limited duration; and (vii) ameeting fee of $1,000 per meeting of a committee of the Board, if and as applicable (including meetings of any special or ad hoc committee of the Board). No additional amounts are currently payable for special assignments. 

*Equity Compensation*

Non-employee members of the Board will also receive nondiscretionary, automatic grants of 15,000 restricted shares of common stock of the Company on the date that the Board member first is appointed or elected to the Board. In addition,non-employee members of the Board will receive nondiscretionary, automatic grants of 10,000 restricted shares of common stock of the Company each year on the date of the first meeting of the Board immediately following each annual meeting ofstockholders of the Company (even if held on the same day as any such annual meeting of stockholders of the Company); provided, however, that the Board member is not an employee of the Company as of any such date. 

Both the initial and annual awards of restricted shares of common stock of the Company to non-employee members of the Board will be madeunder the 2006 Plan, and will vest in accordance with the following schedule: generally subject to the non-employee Board member’s continuous service to the Company, 25% of the shares subject to the award will vest each year on the first fouranniversaries of the grant date; provided, however, that all shares subject to an award will immediately vest upon occurrence of a change in control or dissolution of the Company.
12312001 Form 10-K Exhbit 10.152



 

                        [ ** ] Confidential treatment requested






                                            Exhibit 10.152



Third Amendment to Auto Loan Purchase and Sale
Agreement

This THIRD AMENDMENT ("Amendment") to the Auto Loan Purchase and Sale
Agreement dated and effective May 1, 2000 by and between E-LOAN, Inc. ("E-LOAN") and
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. - Auto Finance Group ("Wells Fargo" or
"Correspondent"), as amended by the First Amendment to Auto Loan Purchase and
Sale Agreement dated March 15, 2001 (collectively, the Agreement") is
entered into and effective on this 16th day of November, 2001.

FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
expressly acknowledged by the parties hereto, E-LOAN and Wells Fargo agree as
follows:
1.The Exhibit E of the SECOND AMENDMENT is hereby deleted and
replaced with Exhibit E attached to this Amendment.

2.The Agreement is hereby modified and amended to incorporate the terms
and conditions set froth herein, which shall supersede and prevail over any
conflicting terms of the Agreement.  Except for the changes set forth above, all
of the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.



	
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. -

AUTO FINANCE GROUP
By:

Authorized Signature


Name:  Cynthia Kuo

Title:  Senior Vice President

	
E-LOAN, INC.
By:

Authorized Signature


Name:

Title:
By:

Authorized Signature


Name:

Title:





 

 

Exhibit E:  Purchase Price

Purchase Price:

With respect to each Loan made, Correspondent shall pay E-LOAN, via ACH in
the account specified in Section 1.6, the Principal Balance of each Loan.
Correspondent will use its best effort to pay within 48 hours of receipt of the
Required Documents for such Loan.  Calculation and payment of Additional
Compensation shall be as shown below.

Additional Compensation:

1.Origination Fees:

As additional compensation for E-LOAN's performance of Services hereunder,
Wells Fargo will pay E-LOAN a fee ("Origination Fee") for each loan purchased
under this Agreement calculated in accordance with the attached Core Pricing
Model.  on or before the tenth (10th) day of each month, Wells Fargo
shall pay E-LOAN the aggregate Origination Fees for all Loans funded in the
prior calendar month pursuant to this Agreement.  Notwithstanding the foregoing,
E-LOAN shall refund the Origination Fee to Wells Fargo for each Loan that is
prepared within [ ** ] days from the date such Loan is funded.

Origination Fees will be discounted based on the aggregate dollar volume of
funded loans within each calendar month according to the following schedule. The
discount is applied to the Spread and the model calculates the new Origination
Fee based on the discounted Spread.
[ ** ]

2.Definitions:
Contract Rate - The Annual Percentage Rate charged to the borrower by
E-LOAN.

Spread - Difference between the Contract Rate and Buy Rate.

 





[ ** ]
#### Marion M. Martin *v.*Raymond C. Martin

*James M. S. Ullman,*in support of the petition.

Decided June 24, 1993

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 31 Conn. App. 911 (AC 11422), is denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 11, 2015

No. 04

- 15

- 00214

- CV

IN RE Juan Miguel MATA

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

Jason Pulli am , Justice

On September 10 , 2015

, real party in interest Maria Elena Mata n/k/a Maria Elena

Frazier , filed a motion for extension of time to file a response to relator’s supplemental petition

for writ of mandamus

. The motion is GRANTED. Any response to the supplemental petition for

writ of mandamus on behalf of the real party in interest should be filed in this court no later than

October 15 , 2015

.

It is so ORDERED on September 11, 2015

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

____________________________ ___

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2714 , styled In the Matter of Maria Elena Mata and Juan Miguel Mata

, pending in the County Court

, Dimmit County, Texas, the Honorable Amado Abascal presiding.
Exhibit 21

JONES MEIDA NETWORKS, LTD.
List of Subsidiaries

All of the companies listed below are Colorado corporations, unless otherwise indicated.

Great
American Country, Inc.
JPN, Inc.
Jones Audio Services, Inc.
Jones Direct, Ltd.
Jones Broadcast Programming, Inc.
Jones Earth Segment, Inc.
Jones Galactic Radio, Inc.
Jones Galactic Radio Partners, Inc.
Jones Infomercial Networks, Inc.
Jones Infomercial Network Ventures, Inc.
Jones Infomercials International, Ltd.
Jones MAI Radio, Inc.
Jones MatchMedia, Inc.
Jones Radio Holdings, Inc.
Jones Radio Network, Inc.
Jones Radio Network Ventures, Inc.
Jones Space Holdings, Inc.
Jones MediaAmerica, Inc., a New York corporation
Product Information Network Venture, a Colorado joint venture

---

QuickLinks
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1154

CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CITY OF ALEXANDRIA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-1800-A)

Submitted: March 26, 1998 Decided: April 7, 1998

Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles William Levy, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Lee Rosenberg,

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders (1) dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint with respect to the

City of Alexandria under Monell v. Department of Social Servs., 436

U.S. 658 (1978), and with respect to the remaining defendants for

want of state action and (2) denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record including the transcript of the

hearing on the motion to dismiss and find no reversible error and

no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm. 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
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 of SRKP 1, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned,
in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

      (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 Company.

         /s/ Richard Rappaport
         --------------------------------------
         Richard Rappaport
         President (Principal Executive Officer)

         /s/ Glenn Krinsky
         --------------------------------------
         /s/ Glenn Krinsky
         Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

August 14, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to SRKP 1, Inc. and will be retained by SRKP 1, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.G., Appellant

and

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, 

PARADISE FOSSIL PLANT, Drakesboro, KY, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-0087

Issued: August 16, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

On October 9, 2019 appellant sought appeal from a purported September 20, 2019 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Board assigned 

Docket No. 20-0087.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that its jurisdiction is limited to the 

review of final adverse OWCP decisions issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation 

Act (FECA)1and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3. This jurisdiction encompasses any final 

decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the date appellant filed his appeal.2 The case 

record as transmitted to the Board does not contain a final adverse decision dated 

September 20, 2019. The last OWCP decision of record was a July 1, 2016 decision of OWCP.3 

As there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP over which the Board may properly 

exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 20-0087 must be 

dismissed. Accordingly,

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e).

3 Docket No. 16-1533 (issued March 15, 2018). 
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 20-0087 is dismissed.

Issued: August 16, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 24.1


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints Jack Chen and Klaus Shen, jointly and severally,
as his attorneys-in-fact, each with the power of substitution, for him in any
and all capacities, to sign any amendments to this Report on Form 10-QSB and to
file the same, with exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that each of said attorneys-in-fact, or his substitute or substitutes may do or
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, this Form 10-QSB has
been signed by the following persons in the capacities and on the dates
indicated:


      Signature                           Title                         Date

    /s/ Jack Chen          Chief Executive Officer and Director     May 15, 2007
-----------------------
      Jack Chen


   /s/ Klaus Shen                 Chief Financial Officer           May 15, 2007
-----------------------
     Klaus Shen
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHNNY STEVEN TURNER

No. 7420SC280

(Filed 20 March 1974)

Criminal Law § 113— instruction as to voir dire testimony — error

In a prosecution for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, the trial court erred in instructing the jury with respect to the arresting officer’s *voir dire*testimony concerning probable cause for defendant’s arrest and search of his car without a warrant, since that testimony was not contained in the evidence and would not have been admissible had it been offered before the jury.

On *Certiorari*to review judgment of *Falls, Judge,*22 March 1973 Session of Superior Court held in Stanly County.

The jury found defendant guilty of unlawful possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. To review the judgment entered on the verdict, this Court granted his petition for certi-orari.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by Associate Attorney John R. Morgan for the State.*

*Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Fanning by Charles L. Becton for defendant appellant.*

PARKER, Judge.

In the absence of the jury the arresting officer testified concerning probable cause for his arrest of defendant and search of defendant’s car without a warrant. During this voir dire examination the officer testified that he had received information from a confidential informant that defendant “was bringing marijuana to the Norwood area on weekends,” that the informant stated that defendant “drove a dark green foreign car with a Chapel Hill city tag on the front of it,” and that on the 28th of October 1972 he received information “that a car had arrived at the Capel house with a load of marijuana.” The arresting officer also testified before the jury, but he did not *152testify concerning any of the foregoing except that he was “familiar with the green 4-door Volvo, bearing a Chapel Hill city tag on the front,” which was regularly used by the defendant.

While charging the jury concerning the arresting officer’s testimony, the trial judge instructed them that the officer had testified:

> “[T]hat he had had some information concerning a Volvo automobile with a Chapel Hill license plate on the front of it coming into the Norwood area with marijuana in it; that on the date of the 28th that he had some information that a car was coming in there on that evening with some marijuana.”

Appellant’s assignment of error to this instruction must be sustained. Not only did the trial judge state material facts not contained in the evidence, which constitutes reversible error, *State v. Alexander,*4 N.C. App. 513, 167 S.E. 2d 37, but he recited evidence which, though admissible for purposes of the voir dire examination, would not have been admissible had it been offered before the jury.

Other assignments of error appear to have merit, but we refrain from discussing them because the questions presented may not arise upon a new trial. For the error noted, defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Judges Britt and Vaughn concur.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 204 (Monday, October 24, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61468]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21137]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1582-DR]


American Samoa; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
Territory of American Samoa (FEMA-1582-DR), dated February 18, 2005, 
and related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that special 
conditions are warranted regarding the cost sharing arrangements 
concerning Federal funds provided under the authority of the Robert T. 
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-
5206 (Stafford Act). Therefore, consistent with 48 U.S.C. 1469a(d), 
pertaining to insular areas, and the President's declaration letter 
dated February 18, 2005, Federal funds for the Public Assistance and 
Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs, and for Other Needs Assistance under 
the Individuals and Households Program are authorized at 90 percent of 
total eligible costs for American Samoa. These cost shares are 
effective as of the date of the President's major disaster declaration.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 
Assistance; 97.048, Individual and Household Housing; 97.049, 
Individual and Household Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, 
Individual and Household Program--Other Needs; 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison,
Acting Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department 
of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-21137 Filed 10-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P