alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Date: February 16, 2001

To; Steve Webb
From: Rick Adam

The following represents the agreement between you and New Era of Networks, Inc.
("NEON") regarding the Change of Control Severance Agreement between you and
NEON dated 9/25/00 attached hereto (the "COC Agreement"), and any and all other
terms of employment that may exist between you and NEON.

1.   If a Change of Control (as defined below) is effected with Sybase, Inc. on
     or before June 21, 2001, you hereby release NEON (and its successors) from,
     and you hereby waive all terms, conditions and aspects of, the COC
     Agreement and any and all other employment arrangements that you have with
     NEON. "Change of Control" shall mean that Sybase, Inc. acquires a majority
     of the total voting power represented by NEON's then outstanding voting
     securities (i.e., Sybase, Inc. accepts under its tender offer at least a
     majority of the total voting power represented by NEON).

2.   In consideration of your waiving the COC Agreement, you will receive a
     cash payment of $750,000 (the "COC Payment") upon the "Change of Control".

3.   As further consideration for this release and waiver, all stock options
     granted to you prior to the date of this Agreement will fully vest upon the
     COC Event. All restrictions on restricted stock granted or purchased prior
     to the date of this Agreement will lapse upon the COC Event. Benefits shall
     be provided as set forth in paragraph 3(a)(iii) of the change of control.

4.   This Agreement will not be effective unless and until the COC Event occurs.
     If the COC Event does not occur prior to June 21, 2001, the COC Agreement
     shall remain in full force and effect.

5.   You are solely responsible for all taxes in connection with any payments
     made to you under this Agreement.

6.   This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with
     respect to the subject matter hereof and supercedes the COC Agreement in
     its entirety, that certain memorandum agreement dated 2/12/2001 between
     NEON and you, and all other employment arrangements that you have with
     NEON.

By accepting this release and waiver to the COC Agreement, you have freely and
voluntarily accepted its terms and conditions and have consulted with or had the
opportunity to consult advisors of your choice.

Accepted: /s/ STEPHEN E. WEBB              NEON
          -----------------------          By: /s/ GEORGE F. ADAM
                                               ---------------------------------
                                                   George F. (Rick) Adam
(No. 6135.

October 4, 1934.)

#### STATE, Respondent, v. CHARLES RAYMOND SMITH, Appellant.

[36 Pac. (2d) 532.]

*779Bert H. Miller, Attorney General, and Ariel L, Crowley, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

John A. Bagley and Charles E. Harris, for Appellant.

GIYENS, J.

Appellant was convicted September 20, 1933, of forcible rape; sentenced September 26, 1933; and appealed to this court September 23, 1933; transcript was filed herein March 14, 1934; the case was set for hearing on appeal for September 10, 1934, appellant’s counsel being notified thereof; at the time the case was reached for oral argument on said day, no brief on behalf of appellant had been filed nor was he represented in court by counsel.

Rule No. 48 of this court provides in part as follows:

“When a cause is reached on the calendar, and neither side has submitted a brief or statement of points and authorities or is represented by counsel in court, the appeal will be dismissed.”

We have, however, examined the record and find no fundamental error; therefore the appeal is dismissed, which results in the affirmance of the judgment, and it is so ordered. *(State v. Starcher,*39 Ida. 327, 227 Pac. 386; *State v. Bariger,*39 Ida. 328, 227 Pac. 34; *State v.*Weeks, 41 Ida. 105, 237 Pac. 702.)

Budge, C. J., and Morgan, Holden and Wernette, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Ralph M. Burch, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, New York County,

August 3, 1936.

*Edgar Hirschberg [John J. Fay*of counsel], for the State Tax Commission.

*Sprague, Seymour*cfc *Sprague,*for the executrix.

Foley, S.

This is a motion by the executrix to exempt the estate from estate tax. The testator died a resident of New York county on October 1, 1935. By the terms of his will he exercised a power of appointment given to him by the will of his father, Mark H. Burch, who died a resident of the State of New Jersey. The property subject to the power of appointment consists of a trust fund of one-sixth of the residuary estate of Mark H. Burch, the income from which was payable to this decedent during his lifetime. *343After the death of Mark H. Burch, his widow, one of the trustees of the fund, removed her residence to this State. It is conceded that at the time of the death of this decedent the stock certificates, bonds and mortgage certificates, comprising the fund subject to the power of appointment, were physically located in this State. It is upon this circumstance that the State Tax Commission opposes the motion to exempt and contends that the property is subject to tax.

The value of the fund as set forth in the motion papers is $19,430.17. If this is the true value of the fund the estate of the donee would nevertheless be exempt as it passes to his widow, who under the Tax Law is entitled to an exemption of $20,000. The personal estate of this decedent is negligible and in no way affects the question presented. Upon this ground alone, the motion to exempt the estate from tax must be granted. Aside, however, from the amount of the estate and its exemption from taxation, I am of the opinion that the taxability of the passing of property by the execution of a power of appointment by a resident donee under the will of a non-resident donor may not be sustained. *(United States*v. *Field,*255 U. S. 257; *Wachovia Bank & Trust Co.*v. *Doughton,*272 id. 567; *Walker*v. *Treasurer, 221*Mass. 600; 109 N. E. 647; *Matter of Canda,*197 App. Div. 597.)

The corpus of this trust consists of intangibles and under the recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court in *Farmers Loan & Trust Co.*v. *Minnesota*(280 U. S. 204) and *First National Bank*v. *Maine*(284 id. 312) such property is only taxable in the State of domicile of the owner. The fund in question, although subject to appointment by this decedent, remained at all times the property of the estate of the donor of the power, Mark H. Burch, a resident of the State of New Jersey. *(Matter of Bradford,*Wingate, S., 159 Misc. 482, and the cases cited therein.) The actual presence in this State of the certificates or instruments evidencing the intangible property did not afford a basis for taxation. Neither did the removal of the residence of the trustee into this State afford a basis for the imposition of a tax under subdivisions 7 and 7-a of section 249-r of the Tax Law.

Submit order on notice exempting the estate from estate tax in accordance with this decision.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 11, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 26268]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11052]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel, ARRA--Behavioral Economics C.E.R.--Clinical Trials.
    Date: June 3, 2010.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C218, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Telephone 
Conference Call)
    Contact Person: Alfonso R. Latoni, PhD., Deputy Chief, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C218, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7702, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eaab868c85849985c4a68b9e858483aa848382c48d859c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="13527f757c7d607c3d5f72677c7d7a537d7a7b3d747c65">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research 
Support Awards., National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 7, 2010.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-11052 Filed 5-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted February 4, 2010

Decided February 16, 2010

Before

WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

 ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

No. 09-3215

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RODRIGUEZ D. JONES,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Central District of Illinois.

No. 3:00-cr-30070-JES-1

Jeanne E. Scott,

 Judge.

O R D E R

The defendant-appellant, Rodriguez Jones, sought a reduction of his sentence pursuant to

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 591 of the Sentencing Commission policy. That

Amendment was in effect at the time ofJones’ sentencing and, under its terms, the district court was

not authorized to reduce the term of imprisonment already imposed. Therefore the case should have

been dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We construe the denial of the relief sought

as a dismissal for want of subject matter jurisdiction and summarily affirm such dismissal.

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance 

with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1883 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1883

 To amend title 5, United States Code, to eliminate an inequity in the 
applicability of early retirement eligibility requirements to military 
                          reserve technicians.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 8, 1999

 Mr. Bingaman introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 5, United States Code, to eliminate an inequity in the 
applicability of early retirement eligibility requirements to military 
                          reserve technicians.

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

SECTION 1. EQUITABLE APPLICATION OF EARLY RETIREMENT ELIGIBILITY 
              REQUIREMENTS TO MILITARY RESERVE TECHNICIANS.

    (a) Technicians Covered by FERS.--Paragraph (1) of section 8414(c) 
of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking ``after becoming 
50 years of age and completing 25 years of service'' and inserting 
``after completing 25 years of service or after becoming 50 years of 
age and completing 20 years of service''.
    (b) Technicians Covered by CSRS.--Section 8336 of title 5, United 
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(p) Section 8414(c) of this title applies--
            ``(1) under paragraph (1) of such section to a military 
        reserve technician described in that paragraph for purposes of 
        determining entitlement to an annuity under this subchapter; 
        and
            ``(2) under paragraph (2) of such section to a military 
        technician (dual status) described in that paragraph for 
        purposes of determining entitlement to an annuity under this 
        subchapter.''.
    (c) Technical Amendment.--Section 1109(a)(2) of Public Law 105-261 
(112 Stat. 2143) is amended by striking ``adding at the end'' and 
inserting ``inserting after subsection (n)''.
    (d) Applicability.--Subsection (c) of section 8414 of such title 
(as amended by subsection (a)), and subsection (p) of section 8336 of 
title 5, United States Code (as added by subsection (b)), shall apply 
according to the provisions thereof with respect to separations from 
service referred to in such subsections that occur on or after October 
5, 1999.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99


                            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 on Form 10-K of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch  Preferred  Funding II, L.P.
(the "Partnership")  for the period ended December 27, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I,
John C. Stomber, Regular  Trustee of the Trust and Senior Vice President and
Treasurer of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of the Partnership,
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; and

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




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST II


                              By:  /s/ JOHN C. STOMBER
                              --------------------------------------------
                              Name:  John C. Stomber *
                              Title: Regular Trustee




                               MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.


                               By: MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner



                               By:  /s/ JOHN C. STOMBER
                               --------------------------------------------
                               Name:  John C. Stomber *
                               Title: Senior Vice President and Treasurer


Dated: March 26, 2003
_______________________

*  John C. Stomber functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of each of the Trust and the Partnership for
   purposes of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000740892
<NAME> INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          21,461
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,901
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,901
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          490,271
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        63,801
<OTHER-SE>                                   (431,370)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,901
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,148
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                65,693
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,314
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (64,545)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (64,545)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

                        ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE
                                  SERIES 1998-B


         The undersigned, Mark E. Elbaum, Senior Vice President - Finance of
Aames Capital Corporation (the "SERVICER"), in its capacity as Servicer under
that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 1998 (the
"POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT") between Aames Capital Acceptance Corp., as
Transferor, Aames Capital Corporation, as Servicer, and Bankers Trust Company of
California, N.A., as Trustee, does hereby certify pursuant to Section 3.10 of
the Pooling and Servicing Agreement that as of the date given below:

                  (a)      a review of the activities of the Servicer for the
                           fiscal year ended June 30, 1998 and of its
                           performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement
                           has been made under my supervision, and

                  (b)      to the best of my knowledge, based on such review,
                           the Servicer has fulfilled all of its material
                           obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement
                           since June 18, 1998 (the Closing Date for the
                           transactions contemplated by the Pooling and
                           Servicing Agreement).

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name as of this 1st day
of September, 1998.



                                        /s/ Mark E. Elbaum
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Mark E. Elbaum
                                        Senior Vice President - Finance
**Exhibit
      23.2**










**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**








The
      Board
      of Directors


Mexican
      Restaurants, Inc.:




We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
      333-22271 and No. 333-130053) on Form S-8 of Mexican Restaurants, Inc. of our
      report dated March 28, 2005, except for Note 1(a), as to which the date is
      March
      27, 2007, with respect to the consolidated statement of operations,
      stockholders’ equity, and cash flows of Mexican Restaurants, Inc. and
      subsidiaries for the year ended January 2, 2005, and which report appears in
      the
      January 1, 2006, annual report on Form 10-K of Mexican Restaurants,
      Inc.





KPMG
      LLP





Houston,
      Texas


March
      30,
      2007
# National Charter Schools Week, 2010

Our Nation’s future depends on the education we provide to our sons and daughters, and charter schools across America serve as laboratories for education. Ideas developed and tested by charter schools have unlocked potential in students of every background and are driving reform throughout many school districts. During National Charter Schools Week, we recommit to supporting innovation in teaching and learning at high quality charter schools and ensuring all our students have a chance to realize the American Dream.

Principals, teachers, parents, school boards, and communities are working together to transform our public schools, and countless children stand to benefit from the replication of effective education models. In the 21st century, a world class education is our best avenue to prosperity. The skills and knowledge students gain in school—reinforced by the love of learning educators and mentors can foster—can empower young Americans to achieve their dreams and lead our country in the global marketplace.

The size and scope of the challenges before us require us to align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age. My Administration is committed to helping schools prepare the next generation of leaders by reaching beyond standardized methods and promoting creative teaching strategies and learning techniques. By giving all our children access to a complete and competitive education, we will pass on the American spirit of limitless possibility to the next generation.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim May 2 through May 8, 2010, as National Charter Schools Week. I commend our Nation’s charter schools, teachers, and administrators, and I call on States and communities to support charter schools and the students they serve.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-ninth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

[FR Doc. 2010-10730

Billing code 3195-W0-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7434

DAVID S. COUSINS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DAVID BOBO; SAMUEL DOTSON; MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Attorney General of North Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Shelby. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-97-28-4) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 13, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David S. Cousins, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: David S. Cousins appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion holding that Cousins had failed to state a claim and find no reversible error. See Superintendent, Mass. Correctional Inst. v. Hill , 472 U.S. 445 (1985); Wolff v. McDonnell , 418 U.S. 539, 571-72 (1974); Pell v. Procunier , 417 U.S. 817, 822 (1974); Leonard v. Nix, 55 F.3d 370, 375 (8th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, we deny acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cousins v. Bobo , No. CA-97-28-4 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 19, 1997). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED