alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2


 


ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF PURCHASE
AND SALE AGREEMENT 


 


For good and valuable consideration
the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the undersigned IREIT Business Manager & Advisor, Inc.,
an Illinois corporation (“Assignor”) hereby assigns to Inland Real Estate Income Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation
(“Assignee”) all of Assignor’s right, title and interest to purchase that property known as MidTowne Little
Rock Shopping Center, Little Rock, Arkansas (the “Property”) pursuant to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement
between Assignor, as purchaser, and IMI MTLR LLC and IMI MTLR II LLC, collectively, as seller, dated as of March 10, 2014, as amended
(the “Purchase Agreement”).


 


By execution hereof by
Assignee, Assignee for itself and its successors and assigns hereby accepts the assignment and assumes all of the obligations of
Assignor under the Purchase Agreement with respect to the Property.


 


Upon execution of this
Assignment, Assignee shall pay the sum of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) to Assignor as reimbursement for Assignor’s
payment of the First Deposit as required by the Purchase Agreement.


 


This Assignment and Assumption
of Purchase Agreement is effective as of the 21st day of April, 2014.


 


	 	ASSIGNOR:	
        IREIT Business Manager & Advisor, Inc.,

        an Illinois corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	/s/ David Z. Lichterman
	 	 	Name:	David Z. Lichterman
	 	 	Its:	Treasurer & Chief Accounting Officer
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	ASSIGNEE:	
        Inland Real Estate Income Trust, Inc.,

        a Maryland corporation

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	/s/ David Z. Lichterman
	 	 	Name:	David Z. Lichterman
	 	 	Its:	
        Vice President, Treasurer &

        Chief Accounting Officer
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 395

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse and

eral Building’’.Thompson United States Courthouse and FedStreets in Reno, Nevada, as the ‘‘Bruce R.eastern corner of Liberty and South VirginiaFederal building to be constructed at the south-
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 395

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse and Federal

building to be constructed at the southeastern corner

of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada,

as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

and Federal Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 395 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States courthouse and Federal building

3 to be constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty

4 and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada, is designated

5 as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

6 and Federal Building’’.

7 SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in any law, regulation, document,

9 record, map, or other paper of the United States to the

10 courthouse and Federal building referred to in section 1

11 is deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson

12 United States Courthouse and Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives December 5,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Patrick O’Day, Respondent, v. Frank Lapham, Appellant.

Order reversed, with ton dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs to abide event. All concurred.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10046

Conference Calendar

 

KENNETH J. MALONE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

POTTER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:94-CV-78

- - - - - - - - - -

February 11, 1998

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

Kenneth J. Malone, Texas prisoner # 662533, sought to appeal

the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint

for failure to comply with orders of the court. This court

directed Malone to file a fully documented motion for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the district court. The

court warned Malone that if he did not file the proper documents

with the district court his appeal would be dismissed under 5TH

CIR. R. 42.3 for failure to prosecute. Although Malone did make

a submission to the district court, it was not a properly

documented IFP motion as directed by the court. Consequently,
No. 97-10046

-2-

Malone’s appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution in

accordance with 5TH CIR. R. 42.3. 

Malone has also filed an unsupported IFP motion, a motion to

stay judgment pending appeal, a motion for appointment of

counsel, and a motion to file a brief in excess of the page

limitation with this court. All of these motions are hereby

DENIED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [SGA/DFA-PY 08-04]

# AGENCY:

Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor.

# ACTION:

Notice: Amendment to SGA/DFA-PY 08-04.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Employment and Training Administration published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         on June 20, 2008, announcing the availability of funds and solicitation for grant applications (SGA) under the TBL Initiative to be awarded through a competitive process. This notice is a third amendment to the SGA and it amends “Part III. Eligibility Information,” under the specific heading “Eligible Applicants.”                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Stockton, Grant Officer, Division of Federal Assistance, at (202) 693-3335.

# Supplementary Information Correction: 

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of June 20, 2008, in FR Doc. E8-13967. On page 35158 under the second (2nd) paragraph, is amended to add a sub-paragraph to read: “A Workforce Investment Board, in partnership with representatives from the education and training community and industry in high-growth/high demand fields.”                

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

This notice is efective August 7, 2008.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 1st day of August, 2008.

James W. Stockton,

Grant Officer.

 [FR Doc. E8-18172 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1770-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-1770-DR), dated June 20, 2008, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         July 29, 2008.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Nebraska is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of June 20, 2008. 

Holt County for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance.) 

Wheeler County for Public Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs: 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E8-18424 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Exhibit 32

  Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant
                to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     Dana C.  Gavenda,  Chief  Executive  Officer and President of FSB Community
Bankshares,  Inc., a federal  corporation  (the "Company") and Kevin D. Maroney,
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  each certify
in his capacity as an officer of the Company that he has reviewed the  quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended  September  30, 2007 (the  "Report")
and that to the best of his knowledge:

1.       the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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:  November 14, 2007       /s/ Dana C. Gavenda
                               ------------------------------------------------
                               Dana C. Gavenda
                               President and Chief Executive Officer



Date:  November 14, 2007       /s/ Kevin D. Maroney
                               ------------------------------------------------
                               Kevin D. Maroney
                               Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 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.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 21.6



                      SUBSIDIARIES OF CROWN NORTHCORP, INC.
                      ------------------------------------

Crown Revenue Services, Inc., an Ohio corporation, is wholly owned subsidiary of
Crown NorthCorp, Inc.

Crown Properties, Inc., an Ohio corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary of
Crown Revenue Services, Inc.

CRSBP Holdings Corp., a Delaware corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary of
Crown Revenue Services, Inc.

CNC Holding Corp., a Delaware corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Crown
NorthCorp, Inc.

Eastern Realty, L.L.C., a Virginia limited company, with 99% of the membership
interests owned by CNC Holding Corp., and 1% owned by Crown Revenue Services,
Inc.

Eastern Realty Corporation, a Virginia corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary
of CNC Holding Corp.

Eastern Baltimore, Inc., a Virginia corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary of
CNC Holding Corp.

CNC Services, LLC, a Delaware limited liability corporation, is 50% owned by CNC
Holding Corp.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO  ANCHOR GAMING 2000 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

This Amendment No. 1 to Anchor Gaming 2000 Stock Incentive Plan (this "Amendment") is dated as of December 15, 2000, and it serves as an
amendment to the Anchor Gaming 2000 Stock Incentive Plan (the "Plan"). Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning given to them in the Plan.

WHEREAS,
the Board of Directors of Anchor Gaming resolved that the Plan be amended to eliminate therefrom the ability to exercise options granted thereunder by payment of a promissory
note.

NOW,
THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows:

Section 6.3(a)
of the Plan is deleted and replaced in its entirety as follows:



(a) Upon
execution of this Amendment, each reference in the Plan to "this Plan," "hereunder," "hereof," "herein" or words of like import, and each reference in any
document related thereto, or
executed in connection therewith, shall mean and be a reference to the Plan as amended by this Amendment, and the Plan and this Amendment shall be read together and construed as one single instrument.

(b) Except
as specifically amended by this Amendment, the Plan is not modified and shall remain in full force and effect.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, Anchor Gaming has caused this Amendment to be signed by an officer thereunto duly authorized all as of the date first above written.

| |  | ANCHOR GAMING
| |  | -------------
| |  | By:          
| |  | Name:        
| |  | Title:       

---

QuickLinks
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before KISOR , BAKER , and DALY

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES Appellee

v. Ethan W. SPENELLI Aviation Machinist’s Mate Airman Apprentice (E

- 2 ), U.S. Navy Appellant
No. 20 2 300194

_________________________ Decided: 7 February 202 4 Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary Military Judge: Kimberly J. Kelly Sentence adjudged 29 March 2023 by a general court

- martial convened at Naval Station Mayport , Florida , consisting of a military judge sitting alone

. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : reduction to E

- 1, confinement for 24 months , and a dishonorable discharge

. For Appellant: Commander Kyle C. Kneese , JAGC, USNUnited States v. Spenelli , NMCCA No. 20 2300194 Opinion of the Court

2 _________________________ This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2 (a)

.

_________________________
PER CURIAM : After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, and Appellant having not challenged the factual sufficiency of this case, we have determined that the findings are correct in law, the sentence is correct in law and fact, an d that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. 1 T he findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT:

MARK K. JAMISON Clerk of Court

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
#### Harrison Graves *et al.,*plaintiffs in error, *vs.*The People of the State of Illinois, defendants in error.

*Error to Kane.*

A recognizance for the appearance of a person by the name of William H. Graves is not forfeited by an indictment against Harrison Graves, and his non-appearance. If the facts of the case warranted it, there should have been an averment in the *scire facias,*that Harrison Graves was the person who entered into the recognizance by the name of William H. Graves.

The recognizance sets out that William H. Graves, of the county of Du Page, and Jesse Graves and David Root, personally appeared before two justices of the peace of the county of Kane, and entered into a recognizance, conditioned that the said William H. Graves should appear at the next term of the Kane Circuit Court, &c. The recognizance is signed W. H. Graves. An indictment for larceny was found against Harrison Graves, at the December special term, 1848, of the Kane Circuit Court. At the same term of the Court, a default was entered against Harrison Graves and the others. The *scire facias*was against William H. Graves. On the return of the *sci. fa.,*Graves, by his counsel, filed a demurrer, which the Court, T. L. Dickey, Judge, overruled; and thereupon an order was entered, that execution should issue upon the judgment theretofore entered upon the forfeiture of the recognizance.

Graves and the others bring the cause to this Court, and assign for error the overruling of the demurrer to the *scire facias,*and that the judgment in the Court below is against the law, &c.

*543E. S. Leland and B. F. Fridley, for the plaintiffs in error.

B. C. Cook, district attorney for the' ninth circuit, for the People.

Opinion by Treat, C. J.:

There is a fatal objection to the *scire facias.*The recognizance was conditioned for the appearance of William H. Graves. An indictment was presented against Harrison Graves, and a forfeiture of the recognizance entered for his non-appearance. This does not show any breach of the obligation. If the facts of the case warranted it, there should have been an averment in the *scire facias*that Harrison Graves was the same person who entered into the recognizance by the name of William H. Graves. As the *scire facias*shows no cause of action, the judgment must be reversed; but another *scire*facias, containing proper averments, may be prosecuted.

*Judgment reversed.*
**EXHIBIT21**

# ** **

# **LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES**

 

**Name of 100% Owned Subsidiariesand Jurisdiction in Which Organized**

 

1.               FEI FSC Ltd. (Barbados)

2.               Knights TechnologyIncorporated (Oregon)

3.               FEI Electron OpticsInternational B.V. (Netherlands)

4.               FEI Deutschland GmbH (Germany)

5.               FEI Company Japan Ltd.(Japan)

6.               Focused Electrons and Ions(FEI) AG (Switzerland)

7.               FEI Czech Republic s.r.o.(Czech Republic)

8.               FEI Hong Kong Co., Ltd. (Hong Kong)

9.               FEI Company of U.S.A. (SEAsia) P.t.e. Ltd. (Singapore)

10.         FEI Italia S.r.l. (Italy)

11.         FEI Electron Optics B.V.(Netherlands)

12.         FEI France SAS (France)

13.         FEI Particle Beam SystemsOesterreich GmbH (Austria)

14.         FEI Europe B.V. (Netherlands)

15.         FEI Sweden AB (Sweden)

16.         FEI UK Ltd. (United Kingdom)

17.         FEI Systems Canada Inc.(Canada)

18.         FEI Europe Ltd. (UnitedKingdom)

 

**Name of Subsidiaries less than100% Owned**

 

1.               Charged Particle BeamTechnology Latin America S.A. de C.V. (Mexico)

2.               FEI Software (India) PrivateLimited (India)

3.               FEI Systems (Thailand)Company, Limited (Thailand)

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

INNOVATION VENTURES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

BHELLIOM ENTERPRISES CORP.,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:09-cv-13783

Hon. Mark A. Goldsmith

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL AND 

BRIEF IN SUPPORT

2:09-cv-13783-MAG-RSW Doc # 145 Filed 11/16/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 5189
Plaintiff Innovation Ventures, LLC (“Living Essentials”) respectfully 

submits this Motion for Leave and Brief in Support of Leave to File its Motion for 

Partial Summary Judgment That Bhelliom’s Advertising is False under seal, 

pursuant to Local Rule 5.3, and prays that the Court grant this motion. There is 

good cause for filing the brief under seal as it contains and references confidential 

and proprietary business information. Accordingly, Living Essentials requests that 

it be permitted to file under seal. (A redacted version has been filed in the public 

record.) 

A proposed Order is being submitted to the Court. 

Respectfully submitted,

BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.

By: /s/ Thomas W. Cunningham 

MARK A. CANTOR (P32661)

THOMAS W. CUNNINGHAM (P57899)

MARC LORELLI (P63156)

1000 Town Center, Twenty-Second Floor

Southfield, Michigan 48075

Tel. (248) 358-4400; Fax. (248) 358-3351

tcunningham@brookskushman.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Innovation Ventures

Dated: November 16, 2015 

2:09-cv-13783-MAG-RSW Doc # 145 Filed 11/16/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 5190
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTRONIC SERVICE

I hereby certify that on November 16, 2015, I electronically filed the 

foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court for the Eastern District of 

Michigan using the ECF System which will send notification to the registered 

participants of the ECF System as listed on the Court's Notice of Electronic Filing. 

BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.

 /s/Thomas W. Cunningham 

MARK A. CANTOR (P32661)

THOMAS W. CUNNINGHAM (P57899)

MARC LORELLI (P63156)

1000 Town Center, Twenty-Second Floor

Southfield, Michigan 48075

(248) 358-4400 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Innovation Ventures

2:09-cv-13783-MAG-RSW Doc # 145 Filed 11/16/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 5191
#### Lynda J. ALSUP, Appellant, v. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, et al., Respondents.

No. 68638.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

Aug. 27, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 17, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Nov. 19, 1996.

J. Richard McEachem, Clayton, for appellant.

Doreen Graham-Powell, St. Louis, for respondents.

Before CRAHAN, P.J., and CRANDALL and DOWD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff Lynda J. Alsup appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of defendants in a medical malpractice case. Plaintiff claims the trial court erred in sustaining defendants’ objection to the admission of certain testimony. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error in excluding the testimony. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).