alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 3.4 CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                                 VOICENET, INC.

          Voicenet,  Inc., a  corporation  organized  and existing  under and by
virtue  of  the  General   Corporation   Law  of  the  State  of  Delaware  (the
"Corporation"), does hereby certify as follows:

          FIRST:  That  Article  FOURTH of the  Certificate  of Amendment of the
Certificate of  Incorporation  of the Corporation be amended by striking Article
FOURTH in its entirety and replacing therefor:

                    FOURTH:  The  Corporation  is  authorized  to
               issue  two  classes  of  stock  to be  designated,
               respectively,   "Common   Stock"  and   "Preferred
               Stock." The total  number of shares of all classes
               of stock which the  Corporation  is  authorized to
               issue is Fifty-One  Million  (51,000,000)  shares,
               $.01 par value,  which shall consist of 50,000,000
               shares of common  stock  and  1,000,000  shares of
               preferred stock."

          SECOND:  By written  consent dated March 2, 2000,  given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 228 of the General  Corporation  Law of the State
of Delaware,  the holder(s) of a majority of the outstanding  shares of stock of
the Corporation have approved the adoption of the aforesaid resolution.

          THIRD:   That  this   Certificate   of  Amendment  of  Certificate  of
Incorporation has been duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section
242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

          IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the Corporation  has caused this  Certificate of
Amendment  of the  Certificate  of  Incorporation  to be  signed  by  its  Chief
Executive Officer this 2nd day of March 2000.

                                       VOICENET, INC.


                                       By : /s/ Frank Carr
                                            --------------------------------
                                            Frank Carr
                                            Chief Executive Officer
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ANTHONY J. FAILS,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:10cv400/MCR/EMT

C. GREEN, WARDEN

Defendant.

__________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated October 28, 2010. (Doc. 5). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections

pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo

determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss (doc. 4) is GRANTED and this case is

DISMISSED without prejudice.

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of December, 2010.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

IVORY LEE ROBINSON,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00043-MP -GRJ

EDWIN G BUSS,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 4, Amended Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, which recommends that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241, Doc. 1, be dismissed. Petitioner timely objected to the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation. This Court reviews objected-to material de novo.

The Court previously denied Petitioner’s request for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254 and denied Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability. In order to file a

second or successive habeas petition, the petitioner must first obtain an order from the court of

appeals authorizing the district court to consider it. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Absent

authorization, the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive petition. See

Farris v. United States, 333 F.3d 1211, 1216 (11th Cir. 2003) (addressing a successive motion to

vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255). Petitioner’s objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation do not change the fact that the Court lacks the authority to entertain his claims. 

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
Page 2 of 2

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, Doc. 4, is ADOPTED

and incorporated herein.

2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Doc. 1, is

DISMISSED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of March, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 1:11-cv-00043-MP -GRJ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PANAMA CITY DIVISION 

ROBERT J. MEYER, Individually and on 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

THE ST. JOE COMPANY, et al., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 5:11-cv-00027-RS-EMT 

CLASS ACTION

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Notice is hereby given that Lead Plaintiff City of Southfield Fire & Police Retirement 

System, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, in the above-named case, hereby 

appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit from the Judgment entered in 

favor of the defendants on January 12, 2012. This notice encompasses the Judgment entered by the 

Clerk of the Court as well as all prior and subsequent rulings related to the Judgment. 

Case 5:11-cv-00027-RS-EMT Document 124 Filed 03/15/12 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

DATED: March 15, 2012 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN 

 & DOWD LLP 

s/ Douglas Wilens 

DOUGLAS WILENS 

PAUL J. GELLER 

Florida Bar No. 984795 

JACK REISE 

Florida Bar No. 58149 

DOUGLAS WILENS 

Florida Bar No. 79987 

STEPHEN R. ASTLEY 

Florida Bar No. 139254 

120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500 

Boca Raton, FL 33432-4809 

Telephone: 561/750-3000 

561/750-3364 (fax) 

pgeller@rgrdlaw.com 

jreise@rgrdlaw.com

dwilens@rgrdlaw.com 

sastley@rgrdlaw.com 

LABATON SUCHAROW LLP

MARK S. ARISOHN 

JONATHAN GARDNER 

MINDY S. DOLGOFF 

140 Broadway, 34th Floor 

New York, NY 10005-1108 

Telephone: 212/907-0700 

212/818-0477 (fax) 

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiff 

VANOVERBEKE MICHAUD & 

 TIMMONY, P.C.

THOMAS C. MICHAUD 

79 Alfred Street 

Detroit, MI 48201-3120 

Telephone: 313/578-1200 

313/578-1201 (fax) 

Additional Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 5:11-cv-00027-RS-EMT Document 124 Filed 03/15/12 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 15, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing with the 

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a Notice of Electronic Filing to all 

counsel of record. 

s/ Douglas Wilens 

 DOUGLAS WILENS

Case 5:11-cv-00027-RS-EMT Document 124 Filed 03/15/12 Page 3 of 3
FLND Form 245B (rev 12/2003) Judgment in a Criminal Case Page 2 of 8

1:11cr11-001/MMP - RAUL PAGAN RODRIGUEZ

IMPRISONMENT

The defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons to be

imprisoned for a total term of 239 months. This term consists of 71 months as to Count One,

84 months imprisonment as to Count Three, to run consecutive to Count One, and 84

months imprisonment as to Count Five, to run consecutive to Count Three. 

The court recommends that the defendant be designated to a Bureau of Prisons facility for

confinement in Florida, for visitation by family.

The court also recommends that the defendant participate in the Residential Drug Abuse Program

or other such similar programs offered through the Bureau of Prisons for the treatment of drug

addiction.

The defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.

RETURN

I have executed this judgment as follows:

Defendant delivered on ____________________ to _________________________________

 at _____________________________________________, with a certified copy of this judgment.

__________________________________

UNITED STATES MARSHAL 

By:__________________________________

Deputy U.S. Marshal 

Case 1:11-cr-00011-MP-GRJ Document 138 Filed 04/13/12 Page 2 of 8
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Donald W. Morgan, certify that:

    1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) of
Larscom Incorporated; and

    2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

Date: April 28, 2004

By: /s/ Donald W. Morgan
    -----------------------
    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION of  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of EF Johnson Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael E. Jalbert, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/ MICHAEL E. JALBERT Michael E. Jalbert Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 31, 2010


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Kenneth Deane,Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K/A-1 for Isonics Corporation (the “Registrant”)for the year ended April 30, 2007;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for,the periods presented in this report;

4.                 The Registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the Registrant is made known to us by others, particularly during the periodin which this annual report is being prepared;

(b)         intentionally omitted perSEC Rel. 33-8238;

(c)          Evaluated theeffectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

(d)         Disclosed in this reportany change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The Registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions);

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and 

(b)         Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| August 28, 2007            |   |
|----------------------------|--------|
| /S/  KENNETH DEANE         |   |
| Kenneth Deane              |   |
| *Chief  Financial Officer* |   |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DARIUS WILSON,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-133-RS-EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 25). 

No objections have been filed.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is 

approved and incorporated in this Order.

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED. 

3. The certificate of appealability is DENIED because Petitioner 

did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.

4. The clerk is directed to close the file.

ORDERED on July 31, 2012.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:11-cv-00133-RS-EMT Document 27 Filed 08/01/12 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. SALLIE

No. 90 PC.

Case below: 13 N.C. App. 499.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 24 May 1972.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 31 (Thursday, February 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 7460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-687]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Stipulation Modifying Settlement Under the 
Clean Air Act

    Notice is hereby given that on February 2, 2007, a proposed 
Stipulation and Order modifying the Consent Decree in United States v. 
City of New York, Civil No. 99-2207, has been lodged with the United 
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
    The original Consent Decree resolved the government's claims 
against New York City and the New York Department of Sanitation 
(collectively, the ``City'') for violations of the Clean Air Act 
arising from the City's improper disposal of appliances containing 
ozone-depleting substances. The proposed stipulation provides for the 
City to perform a Supplemental Environmental Project (``SEP'') 
comprising an urban forest project in lieu of two SEPs required under 
the original Consent Decree.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the 
Stipulation and Order. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, P.O. Box 
7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044-7611, and should 
refer to U.S. v. City of New York, D.J. Ref. 90-5-2-1-06471.
    The Stipulation and Order may be examined at the Office of the 
United States Attorney, 86 Chambers Street, 3rd Fl., New York, NY 
10007, and at the Region II Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region II Records Center, 290 Broadway, 17th Floor, New York, 
NY 10007-1866. During the public comment period, the Stipulation and 
Order may also be examined on the following Department of Justice Web 
site: http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 
Stipulation and Order may also be obtained by mail from the Consent 
Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, 
DC 20044-7611 or by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia Fleetwood 
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#35415a5b5c541b5359505041425a5a51754046515a5f1b525a43"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ed998283848cc38b818888999a828289ad989e898287c38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>, fax no. (202) 514-0097, phone confirmation 
number (202) 514-1547. In requesting a copy from the Consent Decree 
Library, please enclose a check in the amount of $5.25 (25 cents per 
page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if by e-mail 
or fax, forward a check in that amount to the Consent Decree Library at 
the stated address.

Ronald G. Gluck,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 07-687 Filed 2-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410--15--M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
TRU.8.2.2014-Ex10.2




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
TOYS “R” US, INC.
2010 INCENTIVE PLAN
This Amendment No. 2 (this “Amendment”) to the Toys “R” Us, Inc. 2010 Incentive Plan, as previously amended effective as of November 14, 2013 (the “Plan”), shall become effective as of September 4, 2014.  Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meaning given to such terms in the Plan.


		
	1.
	The following definition of “2005 Plan” is added to the end of Section 2.1 of the Plan:




“(qq)  ‘2005 Plan’ means the Company’s Amended and Restated 2005 Management Equity Plan, as last amended on March 12, 2013.”


		
	2.
	The first sentence of Section 5.1 of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:




“Subject to adjustment as provided in Sections 5.2 and 14.1, the aggregate number of Shares reserved and available for issuance pursuant to Awards granted under the Plan shall be equal to the sum of the below clauses (i) through (iii):


		
	(i)
	3,750,000 Shares; plus


		
	(ii)
	the number of Shares available for issuance under the 2005 Plan as of July 17, 2014; plus







		
	(iii)
	any Shares that, after July 17, 2014, would otherwise have reverted back to the 2005 Plan and again become available for issuance under the 2005 Plan pursuant to Section 3.2 thereof.”


		
	3.
	The following sentence is hereby added to the end of Section 3.2 of the Plan:




“The Plan will not in any way affect outstanding awards that were granted under the 2005 Plan and no new awards may be granted under the 2005 Plan as of July 17, 2014.”


		
	4.
	Continuing Force and Effect.  The Plan, as modified by the terms of this Amendment, shall continue in full force and effect from and after the date of the adoption of this Amendment set forth above.






I hereby certify that the foregoing Amendment was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of Toys “R” Us, Inc. as of July 17, 2014.


Executed on this 4th day of September, 2014.




/s/ David J. Schwartz        
David J. Schwartz    
Corporate Secretary
<PAGE>   1



                                                                     EXHIBIT 11


                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                     YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                          ----------------------------------------------
                                                 1996             1995              1994
                                          -----------      -----------      ------------

<S>                                       <C>              <C>               <C>
Net Income                                $56,612,720      $51,137,417       $52,655,748
                                          ===========      ===========      ============
Earnings per share                              $1.83            $1.55             $1.54
                                          ===========      ===========      ============
Weighted average number of shares
outstanding                                30,990,599       32,964,138        34,187,833
                                          ===========      ===========      ============
</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

BERNARD C. McGEE,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-80-RS-GRJ

TIFFT, et al.,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

ORDER

Before me are the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 

68) and Plaintiff’s Objections (Doc. 73). I have reviewed Plaintiff’s Objections de 

novo.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is 

approved and incorporated in this Order.

2. Plaintiff’s First amended Complaint (Doc. 7) is DISMISSED 

for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under Plaintiff’s 

alternative theory of exhaustion, unavailability.

3. Judgment in favor of Defendants remains in effect.

4. The Clerk is directed to close the case.
ORDERED on May 8, 2013.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
**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 Annual Report of National Holdings Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Mark Goldwasser, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/
      Mark Goldwasser


Mark
      Goldwasser


Chief
      Executive Officer


December
      7, 2006
# C_2011190EN.01000101.xml

| 30.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6126 — Thermo Fisher/Dionex Corporation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2011/C 190/01)

On 13 May 2011, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6126. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6126. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---