alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ASSIGNMENT OF LOAN


          THIS ASSIGNMENT OF LOAN (this  "Assignment")  effective as of the 14th
     day of January,  2000,  by and among ROBERT E. SCHMIDT,  JR.  ("Assignor"),
     SCHMIDT   INTERNATIONAL,   LLC,  a  Florida   limited   liability   company
     ("Assignee"),  AARICA HOLDINGS, INC., a Texas corporation ("Borrower"), and
     CAROL KOLOZS,  AARICA SPORT, S.A. de C.V., AND TAIMEX  INDUSTRIES,  S.A. de
     C.V. (collectively the "Guarantors").

         WHEREAS,  Borrower,  Guarantors, and Assignor entered into that certain
Loan  Agreement  dated  March 8, 1999,  as  amended,  whereby  Borrower  and its
subsidiaries  borrowed an aggregate of $2,377,500.00  from Assignor (the "Loan")
and Guarantors guaranteed the Loan; and

         WHEREAS,  Assignor  desires to assign  all of his  rights,  title,  and
interest under the Loan,  including all loan documents,  promissory  notes,  and
security  documents  , and  Assignee is willing to accept  such  assignment  and
assume all obligations thereunder.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises herein contained,  Ten
Dollars  ($10.00),  and other good and valuable  consideration,  the receipt and
sufficiency  of which are  hereby  acknowledged,  the  parties  hereto  agree as
follows:

          1.  Recitals.  The above  recitals are hereby  incorporated  herein by
     reference.

          2.  Assignment  of Loan.  Assignor  hereby  assigns all of his rights,
     title, and interest under the Loan to Assignee.

          3. Acceptance of Assignment. Assignee hereby accepts the assignment of
     all of Assignor's  rights,  title,  and interest  under the Loan,  relieves
     Assignor of all liability, and assumes all obligations thereunder.

          4. Consent.  Borrower and Guarantors  hereby consent to the Assignment
     of the Loan from Assignor to Assignee.
         IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the parties hereto have executed this  Assignment
the day and year first above written.

ASSIGNEE:                                                     ASSIGNOR:

SCHMIDT INTERNATIONAL, LLC


By: /s/ Robert E. Schmidt, Jr.      ___              /s/ Robert E. Schmidt, Jr.
    -----------------------------------              --------------------------
      Robert E. Schmidt, Member                         Robert E. Schmidt, Jr.




<PAGE>


BORROWER:                                            GUARANTOR:

AARICA HOLDINGS, INC.


By: /s/ Carol Kolozs       _____                              /s/ Carol Kolozs
    ----------------------------                              ----------------
      Carol Kolozs, President                                 Carol Kolozs



GUARANTOR:

AARICA SPORT, S.A. de C.V.                  TAIMEX INDUSTRIES, S.A. de C.V.


By: /s/ Carol Kolozs                                    By:_ /s/ Carol Kolozs
   -----------------                                    -----------------------
      Carol Kolozs, President                           Carol Kolozs, President



ORLDOCS 10007046.1 LMW
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 4.7

                             AMENDED AND RESTATED
                           ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                      OF
                            PAC-WEST TELECOMM, INC.


                                   ARTICLE I
                                   ---------


          The name of this Corporation is Pac-West Telecomm, Inc.


                                  ARTICLE II
                                  ----------

          The purpose of this Corporation is to engage in any lawful act or
activity for which a corporation may be organized under the General Corporation
Law of California other than the banking business, the trust company business or
the practice of a profession permitted to be incorporated by the California
Corporations Code.


                                  ARTICLE III
                                  -----------

          Section 1.  Authorized Shares.  The corporation is authorized to issue
                      -----------------
two classes of shares, to be designated common and preferred, respectively.  The
corporation is authorized to issues 100,000,000 shares of common stock and
10,000,000 shares of preferred stock.

          Section 2.  Preferred Shares.  The shares of preferred stock may be
                      ----------------
issued in any number of series, as determined by the Board of Directors.  The
Board may, by resolution, establish the designation and number of shares of any
such series, and may determine, alter or revoke the rights, preferences and
restrictions pertaining to any wholly unissued series.  The Board may
thereafter, by resolution, alter the number of shares of any such series.

                                  ARTICLE IV
                                  ----------

          Section 1.  Elimination of Director Liability.  The liability of
                      ---------------------------------
directors of the Corporation for monetary damages shall be eliminated to the
fullest extent permissible under California law.

                                       1
<PAGE>

          Section 2.  Indemnification.  The Corporation is authorized to provide
                      ---------------
indemnification of agents (as defined in Section 317 of the California
Corporations Code) through Bylaw provisions, agreements with agents, vote of
shareholders or disinterested directors, or otherwise, to the fullest extent
permissible under California law.

          Section 3.  Effect of Amendment.  Any amendment, repeal or
                      -------------------
modification of any provision of this Article IV shall not adversely affect any
right or protection of an agent of this Corporation existing at the time of such
amendment, repeal or modification.

                                  *  *  *  *

                                       2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash

Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

2415 East Camelback Road, Suite 800

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

(602) 364-7000

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Joseph Sorge, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Yelp, Inc., 

Defendant. 

No. 2:17-cv-04518-JJT 

NOTICE OF SERVICE OF 

DISCOVERY 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Defendant Yelp Inc. (“Defendant”), by and 

through undersigned counsel, served its Responses to Plaintiff’s First Requests for 

Admissions, First Set of Interrogatories and First Request for Production on counsel for 

Plaintiff Joseph Sorge by electronic mail on November 19, 2018. 

DATED this 19th day of November 2018. 

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, 

SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 

By: s/ Alexandra J. Gill 

L. Eric Dowell 

Alexandra J. Gill 

2415 East Camelback Road, Suite 800 

Phoenix, Arizona 85016 

Attorneys for Defendant Yelp Inc. 

L. Eric Dowell, SBN 011458 

Alexandra J. Gill, SBN 027506 

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., SBN 00504800 

2415 East Camelback Road, Suite 800 

Phoenix, Arizona 85016 

Telephone: (602) 778-3700 

Fax: (602) 778-3750 

Eric.Dowell@OgletreeDeakins.com 

Alexandra.Gill@OgletreeDeakins.com 

Attorneys for Defendant Yelp Inc. 
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash,

Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

2415 East Camelback road, Suite 800

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

(602) 364-7000

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 19th day of November 2018, I electronically transmitted 

the attached document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF Systems for filing and 

transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: 

Joshua W. Carden 

Joshua Carden Law Firm, P.C. 

16427 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 410 

Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 

joshua@cardenlawfirm.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph Sorge 

s/ Debra A. Irwin 

36411948.1
Exhibit 32.1

JMP GROUP INC.

CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the periodic report of JMP Group Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Joseph A. Jolson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code,
that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 9, 2007 |  | /s/ Joseph A. Jolson   
|                     |  | Joseph A. Jolson       
|                     |  | Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 751 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 751

Encouraging States to adopt laws that set clear guidelines for contact 
protocols for personal emergency response systems used by the Nation's 
                            senior citizens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 2009

Mr. Chandler submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Encouraging States to adopt laws that set clear guidelines for contact 
protocols for personal emergency response systems used by the Nation's 
                            senior citizens.

Whereas personal emergency response systems (PERS devices) are purchased mostly 
        by senior citizens;
Whereas there is no Federal regulation specifying the protocol that should be 
        used by the monitoring station when a PERS device is activated or 
        whether such stations should first call 911 in order to get appropriate 
        emergency aid in a timely manner;
Whereas, in 2008, the Kentucky General Assembly enacted the Christine Talley Act 
        (KRS 438.280) which requires that 911 be the first call a monitoring 
        station makes when a PERS device is activated;
Whereas this law was named in honor of Christine Talley who died after suffering 
        a heart attack after the PERS monitoring system she had activated first 
        attempted to contact her directly, and she was unable to respond;
Whereas the monitoring station did not contact emergency responders until after 
        she was found by her son and taken to the hospital, nearly an hour after 
        the initial activation of the PERS device; and
Whereas regulation of PERS devices by States may help to save the lives of 
        citizens like Christine Talley by preventing the waste of valuable time 
        in emergency situations: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
States should adopt laws that set clear guidelines for contact 
protocols for personal emergency response systems used by the Nation's 
senior citizens.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-20949

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE LORETO BARRERA-ROJAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CR-457-15

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

July 13, 2001

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose

Loreto Barrera-Rojas has filed a motion for leave to withdraw as

counsel and a brief in support in accordance with Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Barrera was provided a

copy of counsel’s Anders motion and brief but has not filed a

response. 

Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief

reveals no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly,

counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is
No. 00-20949 

-2-

excused from further responsibilities in this case, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Case 2:18-cv-00719-DLR Document 1 Filed 03/06/18 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:18-cv-00719-DLR Document 1 Filed 03/06/18 Page 2 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Dolores Eileen Elgrably, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Commissioner of Social Security 

Administration, 

Defendant. 

No. CV-17-04760-PHX-JAT

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the 

Equal Access to Justice Act. (Doc. 16). Defendant does not oppose the motion. (Doc. 

18). The Court deems Defendant’s lack of opposition to be a concession that its litigation 

position was not substantially justified. See generally Russell v. Sullivan, 930 F.2d 1443, 

1445 (9th Cir. 1991). Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Equal Access to Justice fees (Doc. 16) in the 

amount of $6,560.72 is granted and costs are granted in the amount of $400.00. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this award shall be payable directly to Plaintiff 

and is subject to offset to satisfy any pre-existing debt that Plaintiff owes the United States 

pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 593 (2010). 

Dated this 28th day of March, 2019.
|   | (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 Partnership. |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/    Meg A. Gentle                                                                                    |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Meg A. GentleChief Financial Officer of Cheniere Energy Partners GP, LLC, general partner of Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. |   |

----
#### Edward M. STEUTERMANN, Movant, v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Respondent.

No. 94-SC-901-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

Dec. 22, 1994.

*ORDER*

Movant, Edward M. Steutermann, requests permission to resign from the Kentucky Bar Association and to surrender his license to practice law in the Commonwealth for a period of two years. The KBA has no objection.

Movant has been charged by the Inquiry Tribunal with five counts of professional misconduct in violation of SCR 3.130-1.3 and 8.3(c). Specifically, in January of 1992, the movant agreed to represent two clients for the preparation and filing of a patent application with the U.S. patent office. Almost a year passed, but the attorney failed to file the application. He is charged with failing to act with reasonable diligence in representing his clients, under SCR 3.130-1.3. After inquiry by his clients, in November of 1992, movant provided them with a false serial number which he claimed was for the filed patent application. This serial number was not related to the patent application of his clients, as no application had ever been filed by this attorney. Movant has been charged with violating SCR 3.130-8.3(c), engaging in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Movant has admitted this activity.

In December 1992, movant contacted his clients and informed them that their patent application had been rejected. He then faxed a forged or fabricated patent rejection document to his clients. Movant has also admitted to the activity underlying this second violation of SCR 3.130-8.3(c).

Movant has also been charged with violations of SCR 3.130-1.3 and 8.3(c) concerning conduct "with another client in 1991. In that instance, he solicited and received $675.00 from his client for payment of a maintenance fee on a different patent. However, movant allegedly did not forward the maintenance check to the U.S. Patent Office.

This Court finds that, by his own admission, movant has engaged in fraudulent and deceitful activities, twice violating SCR 3.130-8.3(c). Pursuant to SCR 3.480(3), mov-ant is hereby permitted to resign from the KBA under terms of a two-year suspension. Movant shall abide by all rules and regulations governing such resignation, including, but not limited to, prohibition from practicing law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky for two years, paying any costs associated with his disciplinary proceeding, in accordance *779with SCR 3.450, and notifying all current clients in compliance with SCR 3.390.

ENTERED: December 22, 1994.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens

Chief Justice
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 758 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 758

Commending the Water Replenishment District of Southern California for 
        a job well done on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 2009

Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California (for herself, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Ms. 
  Harman, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Gary G. Miller of California, and Ms. 
 Richardson) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Commending the Water Replenishment District of Southern California for 
        a job well done on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.

Whereas the Water Replenishment District of Southern California was created by 
        the voters on November 17, 1959;
Whereas the election was the culmination of a 17-year effort by groundwater 
        producers in the Central and West Coast Basins to devise a system to 
        manage and finance the restoration of dangerously depleted basins, 
        retard and reverse the intrusion of sea water, institute a program of 
        annual replenishment, and to adjudicate and thus protect the rights of 
        groundwater producers;
Whereas for five decades, the Water Replenishment District of Southern 
        California has operated to fulfill its mission, thus assuring the 
        continued beneficial use of the basins for groundwater production;
Whereas programs and projects to fulfill its mission have included the 
        pioneering use of recycled water and the expanded capture and use of 
        storm water for replenishment, multiple groundwater contamination 
        cleanup projects in the Central Basin, desalination of brackish water in 
        the West Coast Basin, and the supply of water to the seawater barrier 
        wells in both basins;
Whereas the programs and projects of the Water Replenishment District of 
        Southern California have resulted in the steady reduction of reliance on 
        the expensive and uncertain supply of imported water and the steady 
        increase in the use of locally-developed supply; and
Whereas the goal of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California is 
        to eliminate the use of imported water for replenishment by 2015 by 
        implementing the programs and projects of the ``Water Independence Now'' 
        objective: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commends the Water Replenishment District of Southern 
        California for a job well done on the occasion of its 50th 
        anniversary, and
            (2) recognizes the crucial role the Water Replenishment 
        District plays in the daily lives of Southern California 
        residents.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 Volcan Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sholom Feldman, Treasurer and Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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 results of operations of the Company.

|      |              |     |                               
|----- | ------------ | --- | ------------------------------
|Date: | May 20, 2009 | By: | /s/ Sholom Feldman            
|      |              |     | Sholom Feldman                
|      |              |     | Treasurer and Secretary       
|      |              |     | (Principal Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6430

LORENZO V. CARRILLO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES A. WILLETT, Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney; ROBERT W. BOWEN, Police Officer; RICHARD JENKINS, Police Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-173-2) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 29, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lorenzo V. Carrillo, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Lorenzo V. Carrillo, a Virginia inmate, appeals the districtcourt’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Carrillo v. Willett , No. CA-98- 173-2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 13, 1998). 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