alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND 

EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

 ERIC JAEGER and 

 JERRY A. SHANAHAN, 

 Defendants 

 Civ. No. 01:07-00039-SM 

 

DECLARATION OF NANCY J. GEGENHEIMER 

I, Nancy J. Gegenheimer do hereby declare under penalty of perjury, in accordance 

with 28 U.S.C. §1746, that the following are true and correct, and that I am over the age 

of 18 years of age and I am competent to testify to the matters stated herein: 

1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is excerpts from Enterasys Networks, Inc.’s 

December 29, 2001 Form 10-K Restatement, Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited) at F58. 

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is an excerpt of the November 30, 2006, testimony of 

James Boyer during the criminal trial in the U.S. v. Gaglis, et al, U.S. District Court for 

the District of New Hampshire, Case No. 04-cr-00126-01-PB. 

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 are FBI’s 302 interview notes of Enrique P. Fiallo 

(a/k/a Henry Fiallo) dated September 15, 2004, September 28-29, 2004 and November 

10, 2004. 

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is KPMG’s Analysis on Accton dated September 

2002. 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 338-1 Filed 11/19/12 Page 1 of 2
2

Respectfully submitted this 19th day of November, 2012. 

 s/ Nancy J. Gegenheimer 

 Nancy J. Gegenheimer (Colo. 8981) 

 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 

 1801 California St., Ste. 1500 

 Denver, CO 80202 

 Ph. (303) 844-1000 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 338-1 Filed 11/19/12 Page 2 of 2
3.12 U.S. RESERVE ASSETS

Millions of dollars, end of period

Asset 1998 1999 2000

2001 2002

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Mayp

1 Total ................................. 81,761 71,516 67,647 69,707 69,158 68,654 67,532 67,357 67,574 67,844 69,579

2 Gold stock1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,046 11,048 11,046 11,045 11,045 11,045 11,044 11,044 11,044 11,044 11,044

3 Special drawing rights2,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,603 10,336 10,539 10,827 10,864 10,774 10,657 10,763 10,809 10,988 11,297

4 Reserve position in International Monetary Fund2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,111 17,950 14,824 17,787 17,293 17,854 17,602 17,169 17,078 16,184 16,498

5 Foreign currencies4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,001 32,182 31,238 30,048 29,956 28,981 28,229 28,381 28,643 29,628 30,740

1. Gold held ‘‘under earmark’’ at Federal Reserve Banks for foreign and international

accounts is not included in the gold stock of the United States; see table 3.13, line 3. Gold

stock is valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce.

2. Special drawing rights (SDRs) are valued according to a technique adopted by the

International Monetary Fund (IMF) in July 1974. Values are based on a weighted average of

exchange rates for the currencies of member countries. From July 1974 through December

1980, sixteen currencies were used; since January 1981, five currencies have been used. U.S.

SDR holdings and reserve positions in the IMF also have been valued on this basis since July

1974. 3. Includes allocations of SDRs by the International Monetary Fund on Jan. 1 of the year

indicated, as follows: 1970—$867 million; 1971—$717 million; 1972—$710 million; 1979—

$1,139 million; 1980—$1,152 million; 1981—$1,093 million; plus net transactions in SDRs.

4. Valued at current market exchange rates.

3.13 FOREIGN OFFICIAL ASSETS HELD AT FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS1

Millions of dollars, end of period

Asset 1998 1999 2000

2001 2002

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Mayp

1 Deposits .............................. 167 71 215 75 528 61 162 89 256 111 127

Held in custody

2 U.S. Treasury securities2 ................. 607,574 632,482 594,094 599,043 600,129 592,630 592,031 591,202 593,865 589,531 605,501

3 Earmarked gold3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,343 9,933 9,451 9,099 9,099 9,099 9,098 9,098 9,098 9,091 9,084

1. Excludes deposits and U.S. Treasury securities held for international and regional

organizations

2. Marketable U.S. Treasury bills, notes, and bonds and nonmarketable U.S. Treasury

securities, in each case measured at face (not market) value.

3. Held in foreign and international accounts and valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce; not

included in the gold stock of the United States.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1725 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1725

To authorize an annual Federal contribution to the District of Columbia 
 to reimburse the District for the costs incurred in providing public 
safety services for demonstrations and other activities which occur in 
   the District of Columbia because the District is the seat of the 
                          Federal Government.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2001

 Ms. Norton (for herself, Mr. Fattah, and Mrs. Morella) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government 
                                 Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize an annual Federal contribution to the District of Columbia 
 to reimburse the District for the costs incurred in providing public 
safety services for demonstrations and other activities which occur in 
   the District of Columbia because the District is the seat of the 
                          Federal Government.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Public Safety 
Reimbursement Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF ANNUAL FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION TO REIMBURSE 
              DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR CERTAIN PUBLIC SAFETY COSTS.

    (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
District of Columbia for fiscal year 2002 and each succeeding fiscal 
year a contribution towards the costs incurred by the District of 
Columbia in the previous fiscal year in providing public safety and 
related services during demonstrations and other events which occur in 
the District of Columbia because the District is the seat of the 
Federal Government.
    (b) Determination of Amount of Contribution.--The amount of a 
contribution made under subsection (a) shall be based on receipts and 
other materials and information presented by the Chief Financial 
Officer of the District of Columbia to the Subcommittees on the 
District of Columbia of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
of Representatives and Senate.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          14,785
<SECURITIES>                                    21,535
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,442
<ALLOWANCES>                                       554
<INVENTORY>                                        106
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                46,926
<PP&E>                                           9,293
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,904
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,734
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,500
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,734
<SALES>                                         12,185
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,185
<CGS>                                            2,070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,070
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,845
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    17
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  11
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,368
<INCOME-TAX>                                       479
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                889
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       889
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 06-cr-164-01-JD

Andrew Eaton

O R D E R

Defendant appeared for a bail revocation hearing pursuant to

18 U.S.C. § 3148. Defendant does not dispute the bail violations

and does not seek release on bail. Bail is revoked.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant be detained

pending trial. 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney

General or his designated representative for confinement in a

corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from

persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a reasonable

opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On

order of a court of the United States or on request of an

attorney for the government, the person in charge of the

corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United 

Case 1:06-cr-00164-JD Document 10 Filed 11/06/06 Page 1 of 2
2

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

___________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: November 6, 2006 

cc: Jennifer C. Davis, Esq.

 Bjorn R. Lange, Esq.

 U.S. Marshal

 U.S. Probation

Case 1:06-cr-00164-JD Document 10 Filed 11/06/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Certifications

I, Richard Royall, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Eagle Broadband,
Inc.;

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. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are 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 our supervision, to
     ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us 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 our
     supervision, to provided reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
     financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
     external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
     principles; and

     c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures and presented in this report our conclusions abut the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
     the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;


5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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: July 29, 2004

/s/ Richard R. Royall
---------------------
Richard R. Royall
Chief Financial Officer
("Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7155

JOSEPH FRANKLIN MCBRIDE, II,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RON ANGELONE, Director of the Department of

Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-602-AM)

Submitted: June 20, 2000 Decided: July 20, 2000

Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Franklin McBride, II, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge

Jeffrey, III, 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).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

July 28, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on July 29, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58

and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date

that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the

effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Franklin McBride, II, appeals the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on

the reasoning of the district court. See McBride v. Angelone, No.

CA-98-602-AM (E.D. Va. July 29, 1999).* 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
|   | 1. | the      Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for      the quarterly period ended March 29, 2009 (the “Report”) fully      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d));    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:      March 8, 2010 |   | By:    | /s/      KEVIN T. MICHAELS |
|                     |   |   |                       | Kevin      T. MichaelsChief      Financial OfficerPowerwave      Technologies,Inc. |
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22281]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1531-000]


Alabama Power Company; Notice of Filing

September 17, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 12, 2008, Southern Company Services, 
acting as agent for Alabama Power Company, filed an amended 
Interconnection Agreement with Tenaska Alabama Partners, L.P., pursuant 
to section 205(d) of the Federal Power Act, 18 CFR 
35.13(a)(2)(iii)(2008) of the Commission's regulations and the 
settlement agreement filed in ER07-902 et al.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e1a7a4b3a2ae8f8d888f84b29491918e9395a187849382cf868e97"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="62242730212d0c0e0b0c07311712120d101622040710014c050d14">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 3, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-22281 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-61-01-SM

Edward Davender

O R D E R

Defendant Davender’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 12). Trial has been rescheduled for the August 2007

trial period. Defendant Davender shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not

later than May 22, 2007. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: July 24, 2007 at 3:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: August 7, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00061-SM Document 13 Filed 05/15/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

May 15, 2007

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Karin Eckel, SAUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00061-SM Document 13 Filed 05/15/07 Page 2 of 2
----

|   | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended July 4, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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: August 4, 2010 |   | By:    | /s/ RONALD J. BUSCHUR |
|                 |   |   |                  | Ronald J. BuschurPresident and Chief Executive OfficerPowerwave Technologies, Inc. |

----
Exhibit
10.8


 


Summary
of Directors Ongoing Compensation


 


As
of June 30, 2019 our non-executive officer directors receive cash compensation as follows:


 


	●	Annual
    compensation of $15,000;


 


	●	Meeting
    participation fee of $935 per in-person meeting; and


 


	●	For
    meeting participation by telephone, $435 per meeting.


 


If
the compensation is paid in New Israeli Shekels (“NIS”), the exchange rate of the directors’ fees used to calculate
the fees will be not less then $4.25 per NIS.


 


The
directors are also entitled to two and a half percent (2.5%) from amounts received by us from non diluting funding and strategic
deals, as determined by the Board of Directors and/or the Compensation Committee.