alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5


<CAPTION>
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                             27,000
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      10,000
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   37,000
<PP&E>                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    586,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           5,454,000
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                     3,723,000
<COMMON>                       21,714,000
<OTHER-SE>                    (30,305,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      586,000
<SALES>                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        0
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                2,726,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                115,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (2,847,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (2,780,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                    (67,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                   (2,847,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                       (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.08)



</TABLE>
exv10w4






Exhibit 10.4




IXYS CORPORATION

2009 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN




NOTICE OF STOCK OPTION GRANT AND AGREEMENT




	 	 	 	 	 
	Name:

	 	Option Number:	 	 
	Address:

	 	Plan Name:
	 	2009 Equity Incentive Plan
	Employee ID:
	 	 	 	 





Effective                     , 20___, (“Grant Date”), you have been granted [a qualified/non-qualified]
stock option to purchase
                     (                    ) shares of IXYS Corporation common stock at an
Exercise Price of $                      per share pursuant to the IXYS Corporation 2009 Equity Incentive Plan
(the “Plan”). Except as otherwise defined herein, terms with initial capital letters shall have
the same meanings set forth in the Plan. A copy of the Plan is attached to this Notice and
Agreement. The terms and conditions of the Plan are incorporated herein by this reference.
Subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan, this Option shall become “vested” and exercisable
over a period of [___(___)] years beginning on the Grant Date as follows:




          [Insert vesting schedule]


By accepting this grant and exercising any portion of the Option, you represent that you: (i)
agree to the terms and conditions of this Notice and Agreement and the Plan; (ii) have reviewed
the Plan and the Notice and Agreement in their entirety, and have had an opportunity to obtain
the advice of legal counsel and/or your tax advisor with respect thereto; (iii) fully understand
and accept all provisions hereof; (iv) agree to accept as binding, conclusive, and final all of
the Administrator’s decisions regarding, and all interpretations of, the Plan and the Notice and
Agreement; and (v) agree to notify the Company upon any change in your home address indicated
above.



Please return a signed copy of this Notice of Stock Option Grant and Agreement to [insert contact
name and address of the Company], and retain a copy for your records.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	IXYS Corporation	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	 	 	Dated:
	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	[Insert Title]	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	PARTICIPANT	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Dated:	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	[Insert Title]
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

I, Thomas P. Dunne, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report: Amendment No.1 on Form 10-Q/A of SteelCloud, 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.

Date: October 21, 2005

| |  | By: /s/ Thomas P. Dunne                             | 
| |  | --------------------------------------------------- | 
| |  | Name: Thomas P. DunneTitle: Chief Executive Officer |
#### SOUTHERN BUTANE GAS CORPORATION v. FRANK BULLARD.

(Filed 29 November, 1950.)

Judgments § 27a: Appeal and Error § 6c (2) —

Where the court sets aside a judgment upon its findings of excusable neglect and meritorious defense, a sole exception to the signing of the judgment does not present the findings for review, and the judgment, being supported by the findings, will be affirmed.

Joi-inson, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Frizzelle, J.,*May Term, 1950, of New HaNOvek.

Affirmed.

*Stevens, Burgwim, & Mintz for plaintiff, appellant.*

*Isaac C. Wright and Alton A. Lennon for defendant, appellee.*

Per Curiam.

For want of an answer judgment by default final was rendered by the Clerk in favor of the plaintiff. Subsequently, defendant’s motion to set aside the judgment on the ground of excusable neglect was denied by the Clerk, but on an appeal to the Superior Court *731it was found by the Judge “that the judgment was obtained on account of the defendant’s excusable neglect, and that the judgment was irregular . . . and that defendant has a meritorious defense.” Thereupon it was ordered that the judgment be vacated. G.S. 1-220.

FVom the record it appears that “to the above judgment the plaintiff excepts and appeals to the Supreme Court,” and assigns as error “that the court erred in signing the judgment.” As there is no exception to the finding that defendant’s failure to answer in due time was attributable to his excusable neglect or that defendant has a meritorious defense, the questions debated by appellant are not presented. The exception to the judgment brings up only the question whether the facts found support the judgment. No error appears on the face of the record. *Rader v. Coach Co.,*225 N.C. 537, 35 S.E. 2d 609; *Fox v. Mills, Inc.,*225 N.C. 580, 35 S.E. 2d 869; *Brown v. Truck Lines,*227 N.C. 65, 40 S.E. 2d 476; *Roach v. Prichett,*228 N.C. 747, 47 S.E. 2d 20; *Simmons v. Lee,*230 N.C. 216, 53 S.E. 2d 79.

Judgment affirmed.

JOHNSON, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

SEPTEMBER 19, 2007

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 07-11335

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00365-CR-T-27-TBM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

JUAN AURELIO MURILLO-MOSQUERA, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(September 19, 2007)

Before BLACK, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Desrochers, appointed counsel for Juan Aurelio Murillo-
2

Mosquera in this direct criminal and sentencing appeal, has moved to withdraw

from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent

review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals

no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and

Murillo-Mosquera’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4820-3 Filed: 11/20/19 Entered: 11/20/19 13:18:05 Page 1

of 2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4820-3 Filed: 11/20/19 Entered: 11/20/19 13:18:05 Page 2

of 2
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly report of PSPP Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Cherish Adams, Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent thereof) and Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent thereof) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Cherish Adams

Cherish Adams

Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent thereof)

May 14, 2007
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Annual Report of Getpokerrakeback.com, a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Hai Yan Huang, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to her 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                  |                                                                                                                                               
|----------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|December 15, 2008 | /S/ HAI YAN HUANG                                                                                                                             
|                  | Hai Yan Huang
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



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

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19
- 0 710 CITY OF MISSOULA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CHRISTIAN BRIDENSTINE ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 2 9 , 20 20 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 22 2020

06/22/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0710
Exhibit 33.1.4.2

 

**REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH**

**§1122(d)(2)(vi), §1122(d)(4)(xi) and §1122(d)(4)(xii)**

**of REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA**

**FOR THE REPORTING PERIOD**

**JANUARY 1, 2007 TO DECEMBER 31, 2007**

 

American Security Insurance Company, Standard Guaranty Insurance Company and TrackSure Insurance Agency, Inc. (formerly “Safeco Financial Institution Solutions, Inc.”) (collectively, the “Asserting Party”) is responsible for assessing compliance for the period of January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007 (the “Reporting Period”) with the servicing criteria set forth in §1122(d)(2)(vi), §1122(d)(4)(xi) and §1122(d)(4)(xii) of Title 17, §229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations, (the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”) which the Asserting Party has concluded are applicable to the insurance escrow servicing activities it performs with respect to all mortgage backed securities transactions that were registered after January 1, 2006 with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (the “PlatformTransactions”). The Asserting Party used the criteria set forth in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB to assess the compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

 

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period and has identified a material instance of noncompliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. Specifically, the Asserting Party did not have, during the Reporting Period, sufficient policies and procedures to capture the information with respect to the Platform Transactions necessary to determine compliance with §1122(d)(4)(xii).

 

The Asserting Party has concluded that, with the exception of the aforementioned material instance of noncompliance, the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period with respect to the Platform Transactions.

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Reporting Period. 

 

**American Security Insurance Company**

**Standard Guaranty Insurance Company**

**TrackSure Insurance Agency, Inc.**

|   | (formerly, “Safeco Financial Institution Solutions, Inc.”) |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

|   | /s/ John Frobose |
|--------|------------------|

|   | By: John Frobose |
|--------|------------------|

|   | Senior Vice President |
|--------|-----------------------|

 

 

|   | Date: February 19, 2008 |
|--------|-------------------------|
**EXHIBIT 33.4****[begins on next page]**
 

 
REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCEFirst American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. (an indirect subsidiary of The First AmericanCorporation and “the Asserting Party”) is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31,2007, and for the period from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007 (“the Reporting Period”)with the servicing criteria set forth in Title 17, Sections 229.1122(d)(l)(iv), (d)(2)(v),(d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii) and (d)(4)(xiii) of the Code of FederalRegulations applicable to the Asserting Party (“the Applicable Servicing Criteria”). Thetransactions covered by this report include all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loanoutsourcing customers for which the Asserting Party served as the residential and commercial taxservice provider (“the Platform”).The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for theReporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party has complied, in all materialrespects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2007, and for the ReportingPeriod with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued anattestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as ofDecember 31, 2007, and for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.     FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS OF TEXAS, L.P.
*Exhibit 31(a)*
**Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**
I, Michael P. DiMino, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of LESCO, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize, and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: May 13, 2004              /s/ Michael P. DiMino   Michael P. DiMino   President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10.2






Exhibit 10.2




Amendment No. 2 to




American Reprographics Company

2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan



Effective as of April 29, 2009, the American Reprographics Company 2005 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, adopted on January 10, 2005 by the Board of Directors of American Reprographics
Company, as amended, is further amended as follows:




	 	1.	 	Section 7(c) is amended and restated in its entirety to read as
follows:






(c) In connection with each Offering made under the Plan, the Board may specify a
maximum number of shares of Common Stock that may be purchased by any Participant on any
Purchase Date during such Offering. In connection with each Offering made under the Plan,
the Board may specify a maximum aggregate number of shares of Common Stock that may be
purchased by all Participants pursuant to such Offering. In addition, in connection with
each Offering that contains more than one Purchase Date, the Board may specify a maximum
aggregate number of shares of Common Stock that may be purchased by all Participants on any
Purchase Date under the Offering. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, during any
calendar year, no Participant may purchase under this Plan in excess of the lesser of (i)
2,500 shares of Common Stock, or (ii) a number of shares of Common Stock having an
aggregate Fair Market Value (determined on the date of the purchase(s)) of $25,000.




	 	2.	 	A new Section 7(f) is added immediately following Section 7(e), as
follows:





(f) The purchase price of shares of Common Stock acquired pursuant to Purchase Rights
under an Offering on or after June 30, 2009 shall be an amount equal to eighty-five percent
(85%) of the Fair Market Value of the shares of Common Stock on the applicable Purchase
Date, rounded up to the nearest whole cent per share.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5440 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the Transportation Security Administration from accepting as valid identification an I–862 Notice 

to Appear form. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 

Mr. MARCHANT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the 

Transportation Security Administration from accepting 

as valid identification an I–862 Notice to Appear form. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Verified And Legiti5 mate ID (VALID) Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. I–862 NOTICE TO APPEAR FORM AS PROHIBITED 

7 IDENTIFICATION. 

8 Subsection (a) of section 44901 of title 49, United 

9 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the folVerDate Mar 15 2010 00:19 Sep 12, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5440.IH H5440

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5440 IH

1 lowing new sentence: ‘‘In requiring the presentation of a 

2 form of identification in the course of a passenger screen3 ing conducted under this section, the Transportation Se4 curity Administration may not accept an I–862 Notice to 

5 Appear form.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS