alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.41


                       AMENDMENT #4 TO FINANCING AGREEMENT


                                                               December 19, 2002
BLUEFLY, INC.
42 West 39th Street
New York, NY 10018


Gentlemen:


         Reference is made to the Financing Agreement entered into between us
dated March 30, 2001, as amended (the "Financing Agreement"). This will confirm
that the Financing Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

         1.       Section 6.9 is deleted and the following is substituted in its
                  place and stead:

                  "6.9 All financial statements (including without limitation,
                  the year end financial statement) shall be prepared in
                  accordance with GAAP fairly present Borrower's financial
                  condition and results of operations. All year end financial
                  statements shall be audited and certified by independent
                  Certified Public Accountants reasonably acceptable to Lender
                  resulting in an unqualified opinion on such financial
                  statement. Since December 31, 2001, there has been no material
                  adverse change in Borrower's condition or operation."

         2.       The number "One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
                  ($1,500,000)" in Section 6.11 (a) is deleted and the number
                  "Six Million Dollars ($6,000,000)" is substituted in its place
                  and stead.

         3.       The number "Three Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
                  ($3,500,000)" in Section 6.11 (b) is deleted and the number
                  "Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000)" is substituted in its
                  place and stead.

         4.       The first sentence in Section 8.1 is deleted and the following
                  is substituted in its place and stead:

                  "This Agreement shall become effective on the Closing Date and
                  shall continue in full force and effect for twenty seven (27)
                  months from the Closing Date (the "Initial Term")."

<PAGE>

         Except as hereinabove specifically set forth, the Financing Agreement
shall continue unmodified.

                                            Very truly yours,
                                            ROSENTHAL & ROSENTHAL, INC.


                                            By: /S/ J. Michael Stanley
                                               ---------------------------------
                                                Name:  J. Michael Stanley
                                                Title: Executive Vice President
Agreed  To:
BLUEFLY, INC.


By: /S/ E. Kenneth Seiff
   ----------------------
Name:  E. Kenneth Seiff
Title:    CEO
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT R.T.D., by and through his parents; R.D.; M.D., Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v. STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Defendant - Appellee. No. 12-16191D.C. No. 1:10-CV-00641-LEKRLP
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Leslie E. Kobayashi, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted June 12, 2013 Honolulu, Hawaii Before: FARRIS, D.W. NELSON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. This appeal presents the same issues decided today by our opinion in E.R.K. v. State of Hawaii Department of Education , No. 12-16063 (9th Cir. Aug. 28, 2013) (slip op.), to wit: (1) Whether the district court erred in granting judgment to the Department of Education on R.T.D.’s claim that Hawaii Revised Statutes § 

# FILED
AUG 28 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.302A-1134(c) violates the Individuals w ith Disabilities Education Act, and (2) Whether the district court erred in granting judgment to the Department of Education on R.T.D.’s claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act. For the reasons stated in E.R.K. , the judgment is REVERSED as to issue 1, and AFFIRMED as to issue 2. Costs on appeal shall be awarded to Plaintiffs-Appellants.

2
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 88 (Friday, May 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 25318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, 
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of 
Columbia)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Wednesday, June 16, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marianne Ayala at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7978.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Wednesday, June 16, 2010, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Marianne Ayala. 
For more information please contact Mrs. Ayala at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7978, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 
340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: May 3, 2010.
Shawn F. Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-10743 Filed 5-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 20, 2011 

Order 

 

September 20, 2011 

142234(51) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 142234 

v COA: 293285 

 Macomb CC: 2009-000434-FC 

MAURICE ANTHONY RICHARDS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

______________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by defendant-appellant for extension to 

September 7, 2011 of the time for filing his brief on appeal is considered and it is 

granted.
----

----

| Name of the Company                         |   | Country ofIncorporation |   | Percentage ofOwnershipInterest |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------|--------|
|                                        |   |                    |   |                           |   |
| Subsidiaries:                               |   |                    |   |                           |   |
|                                        |   |                    |   |                           |   |
| Gold Frost Ltd.                             |   | Israel                  |   |                           | 100.0  | % |
|                                        |   |                    |   |                           |   |   |
| WF Kosher Food Distributors Ltd.            |   | USA                     |   |                           | 100.0  | % |
|                                        |   |                    |   |                           |   |   |
| Shamir Salads (2006) Ltd..                  |   | Israel                  |   |                           | 51.0   | % |
|                                        |   |                    |   |                           |   |   |
| W.F.D. (Import, Marketing and Trading) Ltd. |   | Israel                  |   |                           | 100.00 | % |

----

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          30,845
<SECURITIES>                                       258
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,045
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     11,789
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                81,924
<PP&E>                                         916,593
<DEPRECIATION>                                (252,921)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 825,490
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,366
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        57,946
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   825,490
<SALES>                                        250,520
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               261,155
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  198,198
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 62,957
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22,822
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,135
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,135
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
(No. 5581.

February 11, 1931.)

#### J. B. ELDRIDGE et al., Respondents, v. PAYETTE-BOISE WATER USERS’ ASSOCIATION, Respondent, FRANK DICKERSON, FRED C. BURRUS, M. E. WEBSTER, ED STRAUS and SAVILLA FROST, Appellants.

[296 Pac. 1022.]

Charles F. Reddoch, Thos. E. Buckner and Scatterday & Stone, for Respondents.

T. A. Walters and Walter Griffiths, for Appellants.

ADAIR, District Judge.

The respondent, F. H. Miehael-son, Receiver, moves this court for 'an order prescribing and 'fixing a definite time within which'a map shall be prepared and filed with the clerk of this court, said map to' be made in accordance with a stipulation entered into upon the trial, and in the event such map is not furnished in compliance therewith, or not deemed desirable, that the original water *348right applications, admitted in evidence and designated at the trial as Exhibit “LL,” be sent np for consideration on the appeal from the judgment entered below.

It appears from the motion and accompanying affidavits that the water right applications, numbering some four thousand, constitute a very voluminous and cumbersome array of documents, all admitted in evidence as one exhibit, LL, at the trial of this cause. The lower court made an order that said papers constituting such exhibit might be withdrawn and a list of the lands involved, showing under which of the various kinds of water applications each tract was covered, might be substituted for that exhibit. Thereafter counsel stipulated that in lieu of such list the chief clerk of the U. S. Reclamation Office at Boise, Idaho, might prepare and certify to a map furnishing the data contemplated by such list, ordered as aforesaid by the trial court. Neither the list of lands nor the map were ever prepared and submitted to the district judge for his consideration in passing upon the merits of the controversy.

This court will not consider an exhibit or evidence, not a part of the record .before the trial court. *(Steinour v. Oakley State Bank,*45 Ida. 472, 262 Pac. 1052; 4 C. J. 509.) An order in diminution of the record will not be made by the appellate court to supply evidence or matters not before the lower court. In support of this well-recognized rule further citation of authorities is not required.

This court has the power to order transmitted to it the original exhibits in a cause on appeal, if upon examination of the record, a consideration and examination of such exhibits are required for the proper determination of the issues raised. Rules 51 and 52.

It follows that respondents’ motion requesting diminution of the record and for permission to procure and supply the map suggested must be denied and it is so ordered.

Lee, C. J., and Givens, Varían and McNaughton, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.17


                   AMENDMENT TO THE 1999 CHAIRMAN STOCK OPTION
                    PLAN OF AMERICAN FREIGHTWAYS CORPORATION
                    ----------------------------------------


     THIS AMENDMENT, made by the Compensation Committee and the Board of
Directors of American Freightways corporation (the "Company") is effective as of
the date indicated below.

                               W-I-T-N-E-S-S-E-T-H

     WHEREAS, the Company sponsors the 1999 Chairman Stock Option Plan of
American Freightways Corporation (the "Plan"); and

     WHEREAS, paragraph 5 of Section 1 of the Plan authorizes the Committee and
the Board of Directors of the Company to amend the Plan from time to time; and

     WHEREAS, the Committee and the Board of Directors of the Company has
determined that it is in the best interests of the Plan's participants and
beneficiaries and the Company's shareholders to amend Section 3 of the Plan to
provide for the treatment of options upon the occurrence of certain events.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


1. Effective as of the date set forth below, the second paragraph of Section 3
(Recapitalizations and Reorganizations) shall be amended by adding at the end
thereof the following sentence:

          In the event of a merger or consolidation of the Company in which the
     Company does not survive and the agreement of merger or consolidation
     provides that outstanding options shall not terminate (or shall be
     substituted), unless otherwise provided in the agreement of merger or
     consolidation, (i) this Plan shall continue and be effective for purposes
     of administering options previously granted and remaining outstanding (or
     any substituted options), (ii) the successor company (or its parent) to
     such, merger or consolidation shall assume the liabilities hereunder and
     thereunder, and (iii) notwithstanding paragraph 3E of Section 2, if an
     optionee resigns or is terminated as Chairman as a result of or arising
     from such merger or consolidation of the Company, options granted prior to
     such resignation or termination (or any substituted options) shall continue
     to vest and shall remain exercisable for such time and in such manner as if
     the Director had not resigned or been terminated.

This amendment is executed and effective as of this 12th day of November, 2000.
463 A.2d 33

#### Commonwealth v. Sortino, Appellant.

Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Oct. 17, 1983.

Submitted June 22, 1982.

Renald S. Baratta, for appellant; Richard H. Pepper, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before WICKERSHAM, McEWEN and LIPEZ, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Stephen W. Delaney, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Celestica Inc.;

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;

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

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



5.     The
company's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's auditors
and the audit committee of the company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



|Date: March 21, 2005 |  |     |                                           
|-------------------- |  | --- | ------------------------------------------
|                     |  | By: | /s/STEPHEN W. DELANEY                     
|                     |  |     | Stephen W. Delaney
Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0483]

# AGENCY:

 Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

 Notice.

# SUMMARY:

 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled “Medical Device User Fee Cover Sheet—Form FDA 3601” has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Daniel Gittleson, Office of Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850, 301-796-5156,                         *Daniel.Gittleson@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of January 19, 2010 (75 FR 2866), the agency announced that the proposed information collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0511. The approval expires on February 28, 2013. A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is available on the Internet at                     *http://www.reginfo.gov/​public/​do/​PRAMain*.                

Dated: April 29, 2010.

Leslie Kux,

Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-10579 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
EXHIBIT 32.2



                CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                       SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,
                         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Technology Research Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Scott J. Loucks, Chief Financial 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 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
          78o(d)); and

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






    November 14, 2003         /s/ Scott J. Loucks
    _________________         _____________________________
          Date                Scott J. Loucks
                              Vice President of Finance and
                              Chief Financial Officer
























                                   - 20 -
Exhibit 10.31.1



AMENDMENT



THIS AMENDMENT (the Amendment) is entered into as of March 1, 2005, by and between Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (the
Company) and Gregory Lashutka (the Executive).



WHEREAS the Company and the Executive have entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of January 1, 2000 (the Employment Agreement), and the parties now wish to amend the Employment Agreement.



NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending
to be legally bound, hereby agree that the Employment Agreement is amended as follows:



1. Section 2.3(b)(vi) is hereby amended to revise the last two sentences to read as follows:



The benefits under this subsection (vi) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executives benefits under the
applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had Executives interest in the applicable Plans been fully vested). The benefits payable under this subsection (vi) and subsection (vii) below shall not result in any
duplication of benefits.



2. Section
2.3(b)(vii) is amended by revising the last sentence to read as follows:



The benefits under this subsection (vii) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executives benefits under the applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had
Executives interests in the applicable Plans been fully vested).



3. Section 3.4(b)(vii) is revised by amending the last sentence to read as follows:



The benefits under this subsection (vii) shall be paid in the same forms and at the same times as Executives benefits under the
applicable Plans described above are paid (or would have been paid had Executives interests in the applicable Plans been fully vested), as in effect immediately before the Change of Control.





---

4. In all respects not amended, the Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and
confirmed.



WITNESS the following signatures:



|                 |  |  |  |                             |  |        |  | 
|---------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------- |  | ------ |  | 
|                 |  |  |  | NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE
|                 |  |  |  | COMPANY                    
|                 |  |  | 
|                 |  |  |  | By:                         |  |       
|Gregory Lashutka |  |  |  |                             |  |       
|                 |  |  |  |                            
|Date             |  |  |  |                             |  | Name:  |  | 
|                 |  |  |  |                            
|                 |  |  |  |                             |  | Title: |  | 



2