alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fifth Amendment to Supplemental Retirement/Death Benefits Agreement



 Exhibit 10.10 
 FIFTH AMENDMENT TO SUPPLEMENTAL 
 RETIREMENT/DEATH BENEFITS AGREEMENT 
 This FIFTH AMENDMENT is entered into this 12th day of March, 2007 by and between The PBSJ Corporation and Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jermigan, Inc., Florida Corporations (collectively referred to herein as the
“Corporation”). And John B. Zumwalt (thereinafter referred to as the “Employee”). 
 WHEREAS, the Corporation and the employee
entered into a Supplemental Retirement Death Benefits Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated December 17, 1987 and four prior amendment to the Agreement; 
 WHEREAS, in accordance with the terms of the Agreement the Corporation issued to the employee 2,000 shares of Restricted Stock (now 30,000 shares due to subsequent stock splits) that are currently scheduled to vest on April 16,
2007; and 
 WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Employee now desire to modify the terms of the Agreement to change the vesting date; 
 NOW. THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 
 1. The vesting date of
the Restricted Stock issued pursuant to the Agreement shall be changed to March 1, 2008 or the first day of the Corporation’s 2008 Annual Stock Window, whichever is later. 
 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement as previously amended shall continue in full force and effect. 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Amendment to be executed by as duly authorized offices and the Employee has hereunto set his hand and seal as of the date first above written. 
  

							
	ATTEST:	 	POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC.
				
	By:	 	 /s/ Becky S. Schaffer
	 	By:	 	 /s/ Todd J. Kenner

		 	Becky S. Schaffer	 	Its:	 	 President

		 	Secretary	 	Date:	 	 March 12, 2007

		
	ATTEST:	 	THE PBSJ CORPORATION
				
		 	 /s/ Becky S. Schaffer
	 	By:	 	 /s/ Todd J. Kenner

		 	Becky S. Schaffer	 	Its:	 	 President

		 	Assistant Secretary	 	Date:	 	 March 12, 2007

		
	WITNESS:	 	EMPLOYEE
				
		 	 /s/ Candace M. Cochran
	 		 	 /s/ John B. Zumwalt

		 	 /s/ Monica M. Vazquez
	 		 	 John B. Zumwalt
null

173.22531
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Annapolis Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the
year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard M. Lerner, Chief Executive 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|               |  |  |  |                        
|-------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|               |  | 
|March 26, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Richard M. Lerner  
|               |  |  |  | Richard M. Lerner      
|               |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
January 12, 2012

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EX PARTE ALVARO LOPEZ TOVILLA

NO. 14-10-01120-CR

____________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having 

considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The 

Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED, and that this decision be certified below for 

observance.
F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

March 21, 2006

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

SHAWN R. CHAPMAN, 

Petitioner-Appellant, No. 05-6321

v. (D.C. No. CIV-04-719-C)

RON WARD (W. D. Okla.)

Respondent-Appellee.

 

ORDER

Before KELLY, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

Petitioner, a state prisoner appearing pro se, seeks habeas relief pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. The magistrate judge dismissed his petition as time-barred by

the statute of limitations. Report and Recommendation, 5 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 24,

2004). Petitioner did not appeal the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation even though he was advised that the deadline for filing

objections was September 12, 2004. In a September 22, 2004, Order, Petitioner

was granted an extension of time until October 13, 2004, to file his objections. 

No objections were filed. On October 28, 2004, the district court entered a

separate judgment and order adopting the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation and dismissing the petition as untimely. Petitioner filed a
-2-

timely appeal in the district court on November 9, 2004.

By failing to file an objection to the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation, Petitioner has waived his right to appellate review of both

factual and legal determinations, unless we elect to review the merits of the

appeal based on the “interests of justice” exception. See Key Energy Resources

Inc. v. Merrill, 230 F.3d 1197, 1199-1200 (10th Cir. 2000); Moore v. United

States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). We do not so elect.

The issues Petitioner raises on appeal are identical to those brought before

the district court. To grant a certificate of appealability, Petitioner must make a

“substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. §

2253(c)(2) (1994). To meet this burden, Petitioner must demonstrate “that

reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the

petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues

presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (quotation omitted).

We have carefully reviewed Petitioner’s brief, the district court’s

disposition, the magistrate judge’s recommendation, and the record on appeal. 

Nothing in the facts, the record on appeal, or Petitioner’s filing raises an issue

which meets our standard for the grant of a certificate of appealability. For

substantially the same reasons set forth by the magistrate judge and adopted by
-3-

the district court in its order of October 28, 2004, we cannot say “that reasonable

jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should

have been resolved in a different manner.” Id. 

We DENY Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability and his

motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and we DISMISS the appeal.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge
---

Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statements on Forms S-3 and S-8 No. 333-138521, No. 333-126958 and No.333-140042
of our reports dated August 29, 2007, relating to the consolidated financial
statements of Net 1 UEPS Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (which report
expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph related
to the adoption of Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 123(R) (revised
2004), Share-Based Payment during the year ended June 30, 2006), and our
report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Net 1 UEPS Technologies, Inc.
for the year ended June 30, 2007.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche (South Africa)

DELOITTE & TOUCHE (SOUTH AFRICA)

Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa August 29, 2007

---
Case 2:17-cv-03826-DLR   Document 201   Filed 03/11/21   Page 1 of 1
#### Betty J. PETTIGREW, Appellant, v. MOBERLY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT and Missouri Uniform School Insurance Council and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, Respondents.

No. WD 48046.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 28, 1993.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 1, 1994.

Russell C. Still, Columbia, for appellant.

Brian J. Fowler, Kansas City, for Moberly Public School Dist. and Mo. Uniform School Ins. Council.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Michael J. Spillane, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for Mo. State Treasurer.

Before TURNAGE, P.J., and HANNA and ELLIS, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from the final award denying workers’ compensation claim for failure to provide notice.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
#### James G. ADAMS, Jr., Movant, v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Respondent.

No. 92-SC-1002-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

Jan. 21, 1993.

OPINION AND ORDER

The Kentucky Bar Association commenced its disciplinary proceeding by charging movant, James G. Adams, Jr., with violating SCR 3.180-3.4(f), SCR 3.130-5.5(b) and SCR 3.470 by engaging in unethical and unprofessional conduct. It was concluded that movant, as Assistant Christian County Attorney, prepared legal notices to certain individuals threatening arrest for nonpayment of a school material fees at the request of the Christian County School Board. It was further concluded that movant delegated authority and responsibility for deciding which parents of students in the Christian County School System would receive these legal notices.

The movant, by motion, requests a termination of the disciplinary proceedings by acknowledging the impropriety of his conduct as charged and offers to accept a public reprimand in exchange for admitting that his conduct violates SCR 3.130-5.5(b) and SCR 3.470. The Kentucky Bar Association concurs.

The movant’s motion is granted.

Based upon this record, the Court is of the opinion that movant acted in an unprofessional manner by violating SCR 3.130-5.5(b) and SCR 3.470 by aiding in the unauthorized practice of law, and for such unprofessional conduct he should be, and he is hereby, publicly reprimanded.

Movant shall pay the costs of these proceedings.

All concur.

ENTERED January 21, 1993.

/s/Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice
Exhibit 32.1

                            Certification Pursuant to
        Section 1350 of chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code

         Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section
1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as an
officer of I.C. Isaacs & Company, Inc. ("Isaacs"), that, to his knowledge, the
Annual Report of Isaacs on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
Isaacs.

Dated:  March 30, 2005

                                    /s/ Peter J. Rizzo
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Peter J. Rizzo, Chief Executive Officer

                                    /s/ Eugene C. Wielepski
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Eugene C. Wielepski, Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 101 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 26029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12939]





                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 101 / Thursday, May 23, 1996 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 26029]]


                Presidential Determination No. 96-23 of April 30, 1996

                
Suspending Prohibitions on Certain Sales and 
                Leases Under the Anti-Economic Discrimination Act of 
                1994

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                Pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 564 
                of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (``the 
                Act''), Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995, Public Law 103-236, 
                as amended, I hereby:

                (1) determine and certify that the following countries 
                do not currently maintain a policy or practice of 
                sending letters to United States firms requesting 
                compliance with, or soliciting information regarding 
                compliance with, the Arab League secondary or tertiary 
                boycott of Israel:

                    Jordan and Mauritania;

                (2) determine that extension of suspension of the 
                application of Section 564(a) of the Act to the 
                following countries until May 1, 1997, will promote the 
                objectives of Section 564:

                    Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Kuwait, Lebanon, 
                Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab 
                Emirates.

                You are authorized and directed to report this 
                determination to the appropriate committees of the 
                Congress and to publish it in the Federal Register.

                    (Presidential Sig.)<Clinton1><Clinton2>

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, April 30, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96-12939
Filed 5-22-96; 8:45 am]
Billing Code 4710-10-M
EXHIBIT 31.1 / 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS  I, Robert Gosine, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cytta Corp. 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have; (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and 5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  Date:  May 19, 2009 /s/ Robert Gosine Robert Gosine Principal Executive and Financial Officer
|    |                                                                                                                  |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P.; and |

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

|                                                          |
|----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                          |
| /s/  Michael J. Wortley                                  |
| Michael J. Wortley                                       |
| Chief Financial Officer of                               |
| Cheniere Energy Partners GP, LLC, the general partner of |
| Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P.                           |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6294

R. J. KEYSTONE, a/k/a Randall J. Keyes,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

D. A. BRAXTON, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District

Judge. (CA-04-189-7)

Submitted: August 3, 2005 Decided: August 18, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

R. J. Keystone, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

R. J. Keystone, a.k.a. Randall J. Keyes, a Virginia

prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the

Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss and denying relief on his petition

filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Keystone has not made the

requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
<Page>

EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                       OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                       AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Steven M. Gluckstern, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report on this Form 10-Q/A of Ivivi Technologies, Inc. for the quarter ended
June 30, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Quarterly Report on this Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Ivivi Technologies, Inc.


                                                    By: /s/ Steven M. Gluckstern
                                                        ------------------------
                                                            Steven M. Gluckstern
                                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                                   (Principal Executive Officer)
                                                     and Chief Financial Officer
                                                   (Principal Financial Officer)

                                                          Date: October 14, 2009

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter
63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the
Quarterly Report on this Form 10-Q/A of Ivivi Technologies, Inc. for the Quarter
ended June 30, 2009 or as a separate disclosure document.


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Ivivi Technologies, Inc. and will
be retained by Ivivi Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.