alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Letter Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
 PortalPlayer, Inc. 
 November 5, 2006 
 Gary Johnson 
 70 W. Plumeria Drive 
 San Jose, CA 95134 
  

	 	Re:	Warrant dated November 17, 2004 

 Dear Mr. Johnson:

 As you know, PortalPlayer, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), is presently negotiating an Agreement and
Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) to be entered into by the Company, NVIDIA Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Parent”), and Partridge Acquisition, Inc., a newly formed wholly-owned subsidiary
of Parent (“Merger Sub”). As you also know, you are the holder of that certain Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of the Company, dated November 17, 2004 (the “Warrant”), which is
currently exercisable for 41,067 shares of common stock of the Company. 
 Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement: (a) Merger Sub
would be merged with and into the Company (the “Merger”); (b) the Company would survive the Merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent; and (c) at the Effective Time (as defined in the Merger Agreement), each
share of common stock of the Company outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time will be converted into the right to receive $13.50 in cash, without any interest thereon. 
 By signing this letter agreement below, you acknowledge and agree that: 
  

	 	1.	prior to the Effective Time, you will surrender and exercise the Warrant for 41,067 shares of common stock of the Company pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the
Warrant; 

  

	 	2.	upon such surrender and exercise, the Warrant shall be null and void and of no further effect; and 

  

	 	3.	the advance notice provisions set forth in Section 10 of the Warrant are hereby waived in connection with the Merger. 

 If the Merger Agreement is terminated or the Merger is not otherwise consummated, this letter agreement shall be null and void. 
  

 1. 








 This letter agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California (without regard to
principles of conflicts of laws). 
  

			
	PORTALPLAYER, INC.
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Svend-Olav Carlsen

	 Name:
	 	 Svend-Olav Carlsen

	 Title:
	 	 VP & CFO


  

	
	ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:
	
	 /s/ Gary Johnson

	 Gary Johnson



  

 2.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-0611V

Filed: July 29, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

ROBERT FUERSTENAU,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Ryan Alan Yeary, Caminez & Yeary, P.A., Monticello, FL, for petitioner.

Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On April 30, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

(the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after receiving 

the trivalent influenza vaccination on October 5, 2015. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. Petitioner 

further alleges that he received the vaccination in the United States, that he suffered the 

residual effects of his GBS for more than six months, and that neither he nor any other 

party has filed a civil action or received compensation for his GBS. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 11-13. 

The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

 

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This 

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the 

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned 

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management 

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

On July 26, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. 

Specifically, respondent indicates “[i]t is [his] position that petitioner has satisfied the 

criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to 

Interpretation (“QAI”).” Id. at 4 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a)(XIV)(D), 100.3(c)(15)). 

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5712 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5712

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 4, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 220 Fremont Street in Kiel, Wisconsin, as the ``Trooper Trevor J. 
                     Casper Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. TROOPER TREVOR J. CASPER POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 220 Fremont Street in Kiel, Wisconsin, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Trooper Trevor J. Casper Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Trooper 
Trevor J. Casper Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Randolph WILLIAMS, Appellant.

Nos. WD 48617, WD 50673.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 7, 1996.

Rebecca L. Kurz, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jill C. LaHue, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, HANNA and SPINDEN JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Randolph Williams appeals his convictions of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. He complains that the circuit court abused its discretion in.admitting into evidence a baseball cap found in the area of the crime scene. He also appeals the circuit court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief in which he accused his trial attorney of incompetence for failing to impeach a witness with her deposition statement. We affirm. Because we do not discern any jurisprudential value in publishing an opinion, we issue this summary order. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b). We have issued a memorandum to the parties explaining our decision.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          UT
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
Statement of Income, Balance Sheet and Statement of Cash Flows, and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                 1000


<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                 DEC-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                 PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,147,577
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         358,415
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       232,180
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,738,172
<COMMON>                                             0
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      657,862
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            (4,788)
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 653,074
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           175,904
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  397,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 512,194
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,738,172
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      637,088
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            23,256
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     521,986
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     545,242
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         91,846
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 159
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  92,005
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        50,488
<NET-INCOME>                                    41,517
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   41,517
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       50,488
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          24,896
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
|   | 1. | I      am the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of      Royal Energy Resources, Inc. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Attached      to this certification is Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended August 31,      2008, a periodic report (the “periodic report”) filed by the issuer with      the Securities Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), which      contains financial statements. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | I      hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,  that |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | The      periodic report containing the financial statements fully complies with      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act,      and |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | The      information in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer      for the periods presented. |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| December      7, 2009 | /s/ Jacob Roth              |   |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                  | Jacob      Roth             |
|                  | President,      CEO and CFO |

----
#### Garvin D. MARTIN, Appellant, v. Bonnie I. MARTIN, Respondent.

No. WD 47397.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 7, 1993.

Donald J. Lock, Gladstone, for appellant.

Douglass F. Noland, Krebbs and Holds-worth, Liberty, for respondent.

Before BERREY, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from order modifying a dissolution decree. Garvin D. Martin sought to modify a maintenance award, a division of marital property and allocation of marital debts. The trial court reduced the maintenance award from $900.00 per month to $700.00 per month due to Husband’s significant reduction of income. Garvin Martin appeals from the trial court’s modification order.

Judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
#### Joe Allen KERN, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 40954.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 25, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Aug. 29, 1989.

*538Joe Allen Kern, Jefferson City, pro se.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., William J. Swift, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before GAITAN, P.J., and MANFORD and ULRICH, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from the dismissal of successive Rule 27.26 motion for post-conviction relief.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO						18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,						AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO						SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lodge Bay Oil & Gas Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended   January 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned certifies, 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 Company.			Dated:  March 2, 2007                                                    /s/ Barry Swanson                                                                                                                     Barry Swanson				                                                                                       President, CEO, CFO, Secretary,				                                                                                       Treasurer and Director (Principal				                                                                                       Executive Officer and Principal				                                                                                       Financial Officer)

----
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

The following are the subsidiaries of BioDelivery Sciences
International, Inc.:



| | 1. | Arius Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant).
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Arius Two, Inc., a Delaware corporation (wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant).
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | Bioral Nutrient Delivery, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (94.5% of Class B Shares and 100% of Class A Shares are owned by the Registrant).
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

| (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/ Ralph Walther                                       |   |   |   |   |
| Ralph WaltherVice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |   |   |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER RUSSELL,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 259 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 22nd day of October, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5799 

To designate the checkpoint of the United States Border Patrol located 

on United States Highway 90 West in Uvalde County, Texas, as the 

‘‘James R. Dominguez Border Patrol Checkpoint’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2023 

Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas (for himself, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr. VICENTE

GONZALEZ of Texas, and Mr. CISCOMANI) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the checkpoint of the United States Border 

Patrol located on United States Highway 90 West in 

Uvalde County, Texas, as the ‘‘James R. Dominguez 

Border Patrol Checkpoint’’. 

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 ‘‘James R. Dominguez 

5 Memorial Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5799 IH

1 (1) A native of San Antonio, Texas, Border Pa2 trol Agent James R. Dominguez— 

3 (A) proudly and honorably served his coun4 try as an agent of the U.S. Border Patrol for 

5 more than 12 years; 

6 (B) began his service with the U.S. Border 

7 Patrol in 2000; and 

8 (C) graduated as part of the 434th session 

9 of the Border Patrol Academy. 

10 (2) Agent Dominguez served at the Uvalde Sta11 tion in the Del Rio Sector. 

12 (3) On July 19, 2012, Agent Dominguez 

13 stopped to clear debris from the roadway that posed 

14 risks to road and community safety along Highway 

15 90 near Cline, Texas. While on scene, Agent 

16 Dominguez was struck and killed by a passing vehi17 cle. 

18 (4) Agent Dominguez is survived by his wife 

19 and 4 children. 

20 SEC. 3. DESIGNATION. 

21 The checkpoint of the United States Border Patrol 

22 located on United States Highway 90 West in Uvalde 

23 County, Texas, shall be known and designated as the 

24 ‘‘James R. Dominguez Border Patrol Checkpoint’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 5799 IH

1 SEC. 4. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the check4 point described in section 3 shall be deemed to be a ref5 erence to the ‘‘James R. Dominguez Border Patrol Check6 point’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 15

- 00080

- CR

IN RE DONNY JOE CURRY

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Burgess2 

### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Donny Joe Curry , proceeding pro se, has filed a petition seeking a writ of mandamus in
which he asks this Court to direct the Hon orable J. Andrew Bench and other officials/ employees of Hunt County and the City of Commerce to unseal certain “ [f] inancial [i] nstruments,” to use the proceeds to discharge his outstanding liabilities, and to take various other actions

. In his petition, Curry does not state that he has filed any motion or other pleading in the trial court asking for such relief

. He also does not allege that he has requested a hearing on any motion or pleading he may have filed

. To be entit led to mandamus r elief, the relator must show (1) that he has no adequate remedy at law and (2) that the action he seeks to compel is ministerial, not one involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex re l . Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana , 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007 ) (orig. proceeding). The relator is obligated to provide
this Court with a record sufficient to establish his right to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer , 827
S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (or ig. proceeding) ; In re Pilgrim ’ s Pride Corp. , 187 S.W.3d 197,
198

– 99 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana 2006, orig. proceeding); see T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.3. Before mandamus may issue, the relator must show that the trial court had a legal duty to perform a
ministerial ac t, was asked to do so, and failed or refused to act. In re Villarreal , 96 S.W.3d 708, 710 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding); see also In re Blakeney , 254 S.W.3d 659, 662 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding) ( “ Showing that a motion was fi led with the court clerk does not constitute proof that the motion was brought to the trial court ’ s attention or presented to the trial court with a request for a ruling. ” ). Curry has provided this Court with neither a copy3

of a motion or other pleading filed in the trial court n or any evidence that such motion or pleading was brought to the trial court ’ s attention and that rulings were requested. Therefore, e ven assuming
that the trial court ha d jurisdiction to consider his motion, Curry has failed to demonstrate that he
is entitled to mandamus relief. We deny Curry’s petition for a writ of mandamus

.

Ralph K. Burgess Justice Date Submitted : May 21 , 2015 Date Decided: May 22 , 2015
Do Not Publish