alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit H 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 643-9 Filed 06/19/19 Page 1 of 5
ase 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 643-9 Filed 06/19/19 Page 2 o
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 643-9 Filed 06/19/19 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 643-9 Filed 06/19/19 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 643-9 Filed 06/19/19 Page 5 of 5
Sixth Amendment to Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. 401(k) Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.10(g) 
 SIXTH AMENDMENT 
 TO 
 ADVANCED MEDICAL OPTICS, INC. 
 401(K) PLAN 
 The ADVANCED MEDICAL OPTICS, INC. 401(k) PLAN (the “Plan”) is hereby amended as follows: 
  

	I.	Section 2.20 of the Plan is amended by renumbering subsection (k) as subsection (1) and by adding the following new subsection (k): 

 (i) An Eligible Employee who was employed by Suppleyes, Inc. on the day prior to the Closing Date (as such date is defined in the Asset
Purchase Agreement by and between Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. and Suppleyes, Inc. dated May 14, 2008) shall receive Credited Service for any period of employment with Suppleyes, Inc. for purposes of the participation, vesting, and
in-service withdrawal provisions of the Plan but shall not receive Credited Service for any period of employment with Suppleyes, Inc. for purposes of determining his or her Profit Sharing Percentage pursuant to Section 5.3(c). 
  

	II.	This Sixth Amendment shall be effective January 1, 2009. Prior to that date, employees of Suppleyes, Inc. are not eligible to participate in the Plan. 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. hereby executes this Sixth Amendment to the
Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. 401(k) Plan on this 13th day of November, 2008. 
  

			
	ADVANCED MEDICAL OPTICS, INC.
		
	BY:	 	 /s/ AIMEE WEISNER

		 	Aimee Weisner
		 	Executive Vice President, Administration, and Secretary
#### Timothy Ray ADAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49737.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 30, 1995.

Rose M. Wibbenmeyer, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before HANNA, P.J., and BERREY and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Ray Adams appeals the circuit court’s denial of his Rule 24.035 motion to vacate judgment and sentence following his guilty plea to charges of burglary in the second degree, stealing, assault in the first degree, and escape from confinement. We have reviewed Adams’ claim that his attorney abandoned him and find it lacking merit. Because we discern no precedential value to publishing an opinion, we issue this summary order. Rule 84.16(b).
#### Derrick EDWARDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49774.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 20, 1995.

Rosalynn Koch, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Christine M. Kocot, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and ELLIS

Appeal from denial of appellant’s motion to vacate, set aside or correct judgment on sentences for convictions of first degree tampering and unlawful use of a weapon, pursuant to Rule 24.035.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CX2 Technologies., Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lester Hahn, Chief Executive Officer, President, and Principal Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer, 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 at the end of and for the period covered by the Report.

Date:  September 24, 2010

|  

/s/ Raimundo Dias

 

Raimundo Dias, Chief Executive Officer, President, Principal

Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer

 

 

 

 

                 
              |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EXHIBIT 32





DUSSAULT APPAREL INC.





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 Dussault Apparel Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Mintak, as Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date: June 18, 2011
By:
/s/Robert MintakName:
Robert MintakTitle:
Principal Executive Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code and, accordingly, is not being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the Report and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.)
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20

- 1357 V

U NPUBLISHED

PAMELA DEZURIK

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: January 19, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu); Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA).

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for P etitioner.

Adriana Ruth Teitel

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for R espondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On October 9, 2020

, Pamela Dezurik 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 she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine

ad ministration (SIRVA) as a result of the administration of the influenza (“flu”) vaccine on September 3 0, 2019 . Petition at 1

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

On January 4, 2022

, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case because she suffered a SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table . Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1

, 7

- 8

. Specifica lly, Petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of the affected shoulder

1 Because this unpublished R uling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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). This means the R uling 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, I agree that

the iden tified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Ac t will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ).2

that would explain the alleged signs, symptoms, examination findings, and/or diagnostic studies occurring after vaccination; Petitioner’s pain began within 48 hou rs after vaccination; Petitioner’s pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain Petitioner’s left shoulder pain

. Id. at 6 . Respondent further agrees that Petitioner suffered

the residual effects of her condition for more than six months

. Id.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran
IV 

House Calendar No. 136 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 941 

[Report No. 111–350] 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4154) to amend the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the new carryover basis rules in order 

to prevent tax increases and the imposition of compliance burdens on 

many more estates than would benefit from repeal, to retain the estate 

tax with a $3,500,000 exemption, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 2, 2009 

Mr. POLIS of Colorado, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 

resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4154) to amend 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the new 

carryover basis rules in order to prevent tax increases 

and the imposition of compliance burdens on many more 

estates than would benefit from repeal, to retain the 

estate tax with a $3,500,000 exemption, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution 

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HRES 941 RH 

1 4154) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

2 repeal the new carryover basis rules in order to prevent 

3 tax increases and the imposition of compliance burdens 

4 on many more estates than would benefit from repeal, to 

5 retain the estate tax with a $3,500,000 exemption, and 

6 for other purposes. All points of order against consider7 ation of the bill are waived except those arising under 

8 clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The bill shall be considered 

9 as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill 

10 are waived. The previous question shall be considered as 

11 ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening 

12 motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and 

13 controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 

14 the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion 

15 to recommit. 

16 SEC. 2. In the engrossment of H.R. 4154, the Clerk 

17 shall— 

18 (a) add the text of H.R. 2920, as passed by the 

19 House, as new matter at the end of H.R. 4154; 

20 (b) conform the title of H.R. 4154 to reflect the addi21 tion to the engrossment of the text of H.R. 2920; 

22 (c) assign appropriate designations to provisions 

23 within the engrossment; and 

24 (d) conform provisions for short titles within the en25 grossment. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

House Calendar No. 136 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 941 

[Report No. 111–350] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4154) 

purposes. tax with a $3,500,000 exemption, and for other would benefit from repeal, to retain the estate pliance burdens on many more estates than prevent tax increases and the imposition of comrepeal the new carryover basis rules in order to to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

DECEMBER 2, 2009 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
exv10w15







	 	 	 	 	 



Exhibit 10.15




AMENDMENT TO TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC.

NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT





     AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”), dated as of September 17, 2008, by and among James E.
Barlett (“Optionee”) and TeleTech Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation
(“TeleTech”).



WITNESSETH:




     WHEREAS, Optionee and TeleTech are parties to that certain TeleTech Holdings, Inc.
Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement, dated as of May 13, 2005 (the “Agreement”), pursuant
to which Optionee received non-qualified options to purchase 250,000 shares of TeleTech’s common
stock at an exercise price of US$7.34 per share (the “2005 Stock Options”);



     WHEREAS, as disclosed in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission on February 20, 2008 and in conjunction with TeleTech’s review of historical
equity-based compensation practices (the “Review”), Optionee volunteered to forego any
benefits that Optionee may have derived from TeleTech’s issuance of any stock options were
mistakenly issued with an exercise price that was below the fair market value of the Company’s
common stock on the appropriate accounting measurement date;



     WHEREAS, upon completion of the Review, Optionee has offered to increase the exercise price of
such 2005 Stock Options from US$7.34 per share to US$7.79 per share, the fair market value of
TeleTech’s common stock on the appropriate accounting measurement date (May 19, 2005); and



     WHEREAS, the members of TeleTech’s Compensation Committee have accepted Optionee’s offer to
increase the exercise price of such 2005 Stock Options and has authorized the Senior Vice President
and Interim Chief Financial Officer to execute this Amendment on behalf of TeleTech.




     NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained
herein, the parties hereto agree to amend the first sentence of Section 1 of the Agreement as
follows:




     1. Grant of Option. Subject to the terms and conditions of the
TeleTech Holdings, Inc. 1999 Stock Option and Incentive Plan as amended (the
“Plan”), a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, TeleTech grants to Optionee an option (the “Option”) to purchase
250,000 shares (the “Shares”) of TeleTech’s common stock, $.01 par value
(the “Common Stock”), at a price equal to US$7.79 per share (the “Option
Price”).



     FURTHER RESOLVED, that all other terms of the 2005 Stock Options, including the vesting
schedule, shall remain the same as those specified in the Agreement; and



1









 





     FURTHER RESOLVED, this Amendment may be executed in any number of separate counterparts, each
of which shall collectively and separately constitute one agreement.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed as of the date first written above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ John R. Troka, Jr.
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	John R. Troka, Jr. 	 
	 	 	Title:  	Senior Vice President and Interim Chief

Financial Officer 	 
	 
	 	OPTIONEE

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ James E. Barlett
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	James E. Barlett 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 




2
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 report of Spark Networks plc (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|                       
|/s/ David E. Siminoff  
|David E. Siminoff      
|Chief Executive Officer
|November 14, 2006      
|                       
|/s/ Mark Thompson      
|Mark Thompson          
|Chief Financial Officer
|November 14, 2006      

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CR-18-00422-001-PHX-DJH

ORDER 

Before the Court is the Government’s Motion for Correction of the Court’s April 

23, 2024, Order and Judgments (Doc. 2079). Therein, the Government correctly 

identifies clerical errors regarding the Counts on which judgments for acquittal should 

enter for Mr. Lacey and Mr. Brunst. Specifically, the Order erroneously directed 

judgments of acquittal to enter for Mr. Lacey and Mr. Brunst on Counts 66–68, Counts 

that the Court found were sufficiently proven at trial. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion (Doc. 2079) is GRANTED and the 

April 23, 2024, Order (Doc. 2063) is AMENDED as follows: 

• Page 73:2–4 shall read: In conclusion, after viewing the record in the light most 

favorable to the Government, the Court finds there is an insufficiency of evidence 

to support convictions under Counts 19–51 as to Mr. Lacey and Counts 69–99 as 

to Messrs. Lacey, Brunst, and Spear; and 

• Page 73:10–15 shall read: IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Oral and 

Supplemental Rule 29 Motions (Docs. 2004; 2006; 2007) are granted in part and 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 2081 Filed 04/26/24 Page 1 of 2
- 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

denied in part. The Clerk is directed to issue Judgments of Acquittal for 

Defendant Michael Lacey on Counts 19–51 and 69–70, 81, 83–84, 86, 88–92 and 

94–99; for Defendant John Brunst on Counts 78–84, 86–93; and for Defendant 

Scott Spear on Counts 71–78, 85 and 93. In all other respects, the Motions are 

denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to issue amended Judgments of 

Acquittal for Michael Lacey and John Brunst in accordance with this Order. 

Dated this 26th day of April, 2024.

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 2081 Filed 04/26/24 Page 2 of 2
exhibit10-9.htm


     

    
      

      

    

    


    Exhibit
10.9

    


    Director
Compensation

    


    Effective
June 1, 2008, non-employee director compensation is as follows:

    


    
      
        
          
            
              	 
      	 	 	 	 	
                      Committee Service

                    	 
	 
      	 	
                      Board

                       Service

                    	 	 	
                      Audit

                    	 	 	
                      Compensation

                    	 	 	
                      Nominating
      and

                      Governance

                    	 
	
                      Annual
      Retainer

                    	 	$	42,000	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
                      Restricted
      Stock (value), three year vesting

                    	 	$	100,000	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
                      Committee
      Chair Annual Retainer

                    	 	 	 	 	 	$	25,000	 	 	$	15,000	 	 	$	15,000	 
	
                      Committee
      Chair Restricted Stock (value)

                    	 	 	 	 	 	$	25,000	 	 	$	15,000	 	 	$	15,000	 
	
                      Committee
      Member Annual Retainer

                    	 	 	 	 	 	$	5,000	 	 	$	3,000	 	 	$	3,000	 
	
                      Meeting
      Fee

                    	 	$	1,500	 	 	$	1,500	 	 	$	1,500	 	 	$	1,500
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Scott C. BABBITT, Appellant.

No. WD 49758.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 5, 1995.

Matthew J. O’Connor, Asst. Public Defender, St. Joseph, for appellant.

J. Morton Nelson, Asst. Pros. Atty., Buchanan County, St. Joseph, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and SMART and LAURA DENVIR STITH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Scott C. Babbitt appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated, in violation of § 577.010, RSMo 1994. Babbitt was sentenced to three months confinement in the county jail and fined $500.00.

Judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
S. 1053 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten 

An Act 

To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the termination 

date. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT MUSEUM ACT. 

Section 4(f) of the National Law Enforcement Museum Act 

(Public Law 106–492) is amended by striking ‘‘10 years’’ and 

inserting ‘‘13 years’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit C

Filed Under Seal

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1281-3 Filed 09/09/21 Page 1 of 1