alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
      10.10**




**AMENDMENT
      #2 TO MASTER FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT**




This
      Amendment #2 to Master Framework Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into
      effective as of the 28 th day of December, 2006 (the “Effective Date”), by and between TXU Electric
      Delivery Company, a Texas Corporation (“TXU ED”), and InfrastruX Energy Services
      Group LP, a Delaware limited partnership (“IES”). TXU ED and IES are also
      referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the
“Parties.”




**RECITALS**




WHEREAS,
      the Parties entered into that certain Master Framework Agreement, dated June
      24,
      2006 (as amended pursuant to the Amendment to Master Framework Agreement dated
      August 15, 2006, the “Agreement”); and




WHEREAS,
      the Parties desire to amend the Agreement as set forth herein.




NOW,
      THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and subject to the terms
      and
      conditions herein set forth, the Parties agree as follows.




**AGREEMENT**




1.  Amendment .  The
      reference to “December 31, 2006” in clause (a) of Section 1.3 shall be amended
      to read “January 30, 2007.”




2.  Full
      Force and Effect .
      Except as specifically amended and modified hereby, the Agreement shall remain
      in full force and effect.




3.  Counterparts .
      This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts, each of which is an
      original and all of which constitute one and the same instrument.




4.  Governing
      Law .
      This Amendment and performance under it shall be governed by and construed
      in
      accordance with the applicable laws of the State of **** Texas,
      without giving effect to any choice or conflicts of law provision or rule
      (whether of the State of Texas or any other jurisdiction) that would cause
      the
      application of the laws of any other jurisdiction other than the State of Texas.







IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment effective as of the
      Effective Date. This Amendment shall not become effective as to either Party
      unless and until executed by both Parties.









**TXU
                ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY**By:
            /s/
                David M. DavisName:
            David
                M. DavisTitle:
            Principal
                Financial Officer












**INFRASTRUX
                ENERGY SERVICES**
              **GROUP
                LP**By:
            **InfrastruX
                Energy GP, LLC, its general partner**By:
            **InfrastruX
                Group, Inc., its member**By:
            /s/
                Alan LevandeName:
            Alan
                LevandeTitle:
            Director












By:
            **TXU
                Asset Services Group Management LLC, its general
                partner**By:
            /s/
                David M. DavisName:
            David
                M. DavisTitle:
            Principal
                Financial Officer
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




March 2011


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: June 23, 2011
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ECHELON INTERNATIONAL FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         22,700
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  49,100
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    1,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               72,800
<PP&E>                                         277,300
<DEPRECIATION>                                 23,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 534,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          54,600
<BONDS>                                        134,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       100
<OTHER-SE>                                     220,200
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   534,600
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               22,600
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  11,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             3,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,200
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (600)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            3,800
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   3,800
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .56



</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.17
                                                                  -------------


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report of United Diagnostic, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2001, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, J. Marvin Feigenbaum, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Dated: February 4, 2003              By:   /s/ J. Marvin Feigenbaum
                                           -----------------------------------
                                           J. Marvin Feigenbaum
                                           Chief Financial Officer and
                                           Treasurer
                                           (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                           Officer)

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the
extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





                                       31
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joel L. Smith

v. Civil No. 07-cv-408-SM

William L. Wrenn, Commissioner,

NH Department of Corrections;

Richard M. Gerry; Robert MacLeod;

Donna J. Timulty; Donna Dufresne;

and Brad Bowden

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: (Document No. 21) Motion for Stay of Proceedings

Ruling: Denied. There is no need to stay the case. 

Plaintiff may respond to the pending motion for summary judgment

on or before March 30, 2009. Plaintiff is reminded that he is

required to either file a pro se appearance or have new legal

counsel file an appearance on his behalf on or before

February 23, 2009.

Entered by: Steven J. McAuliffe, Chief Judge

Date: February 19, 2009

cc: Joel L. Smith, pro se

James W. Kennedy, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00408-SM Document 23 Filed 02/19/09 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States

v. Civil No. 06-cv-421-LM

Kingston, NH, 10 Towle Road

O R D E R

A settlement conference was held on October 7, 2010, in this 

case. The following attorneys appeared: Attorney Robert Rabuck for 

the plaintiff and Attorney Rodkey Craighead for defendant Kingston, 

NH, 10 Towle Road and claimant Theodore Gagalis. A status conference 

is scheduled for Wednesday, October 13, 2010, at 10:00 a.m., at which 

the parties shall update the court on their progress toward 

settlement. The court will consider, at that time, whether the 

parties' negotiations have progressed such that settlement is highly 

likely and a continuance of the trial date (currently November 9, 

2010) is therefore warranted. The status conference shall be via 

telephone and shall be initiated by the court.

__________________________

Landya B. McCafferty

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: October 8, 2010

cc: Rodkey Craighead, Jr., Esq.

Scott W. LaPointe, Esq.

Robert J. Rabuck, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00421-SM Document 58 Filed 10/12/10 Page 1 of 1
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State 

v. Gilbert, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-3021.] 

NOTICE 

This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an 

advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to 

promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 

South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other 

formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before 

the opinion is published. 

SLIP OPINION NO. 2020-OHIO-3021

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. GILBERT, APPELLANT.

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 

may be cited as State v. Gilbert, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-3021.] 

Court of appeals’ judgment reversed on the authority of State v. Dangler and cause 

remanded. 

(No. 2018-0461―Submitted May 13, 2020―Decided May 26, 2020.) 

CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Sandusky County, 

No. S-16-047, 2018-Ohio-879. 

_________________ 

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and this cause is 

remanded to the court of appeals for application of State v. Dangler, __ Ohio St.3d 

__, 2020-Ohio-2765, __ N.E.3d __. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, 

and STEWART, JJ., concur. 

_________________ 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2

Kendall Legal Services, L.L.C., and Laurel A. Kendall, for appellant, Glen 

Gilbert. 

_________________
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO **

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350, **

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO **

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 **

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/                Alan B. Levin       |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Alan                B. Levin           |   |
| Chief                Financial Officer |   |
| August                13, 2008         |   |

----
25

B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Estimated volume Share of outstanding real estate farm loans

(millions of dollars) (percent)

Year Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1995...... 12 0 3 6 4 .055 -.001 .011 .027 .016

1996...... 7 0 1 2 4 .031 .000 .003 .009 .017

1997...... 16 -1 0 3 14 .064 -.003 -.001 .010 .054

1998...... 6 -1 3 0 5 .022 -.004 .009 .000 .016

1999...... 15 0 3 5 7 .051 -.001 .011 .015 .022

2000...... 12 -12 3 8 14 .037 -.037 .009 .022 .040

2001...... 42 10 9 5 17 .123 .030 .027 .014 .049

2002...... 35 8 6 5 16 .097 .022 .017 .014 .041

2003...... 32 4 6 8 14 .082 .010 .015 .021 .034

2004...... 18 1 5 2 10 .044 .003 .012 .005 .021

2005...... 17 2 11 4 0 .039 .005 .024 .009 .000

2006...... n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. .003 n.a. n.a. n.a.

 Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

 n.a. Not available.
#### J. H. SELLICK, Appellant, v. Ida F. FLOWERS, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Jan. 21, 1955.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1384 

CAF 11-01371 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

 

IN THE MATTER OF KAREN MATTESON, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

 

V ORDER

KAREN L. MEINHOLD, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

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

IN THE MATTER OF KAREN MATTESON, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V

 

ROBERT F. MEINHOLD, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

 

HOGANWILLIG, PLLC, BUFFALO (KENNETH A. OLENA OF COUNSEL), FOR

PETITIONER-APPELLANT. 

LAW OFFICES OF JAWORSKI & GIACOBBE, CHEEKTOWAGA (DAVID V. JAWORSKI OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT KAREN L. MEINHOLD. 

PAMELA THIBODEAU, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, WILLIAMSVILLE, FOR DONALD

M., ALEXANDRA M., CHRISTOPHER M. AND VICTORIA M. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Sharon M.

LoVallo, A.J.), entered December 9, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other things, dismissed

the petitions seeking visitation. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the amended

decision at Family Court. 

Entered: December 23, 2011 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 11
                              RDO EQUIPMENT CO.
                     COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

(In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)           Three Months Ended July 31,   Six Months Ended July 31, 
(Unaudited)                                          1997           1996           1997           1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income                                         $  3,816       $  2,262       $  6,195       $  3,859
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------

Weighted average number of shares
outstanding                                          13,180          8,370         13,180          8,370

Dilutive effect of shares for which proceeds were
necessary to fund $15 million distribution of
accumulated S corporation earnings                      ---          1,059            ---          1,059

Dilutive effect of stock options outstanding            118            ---             84            ---
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------

Weighted average shares outstanding                  13,298          9,429         13,264          9,429
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------

Net income per common share                         $  0.29        $  0.24        $  0.47       $  0.41 
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------
                                                    -------        -------        -------        -------

</TABLE>


                                     16
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

INTERNATIONAL COLD STORAGE, INC., MICHAEL MATRAS, and

JOEL BARTHEL

, Appellant s ,

v.

ALL

- AMERICAN FARMS, INC. a/k/a ALL AMERICAN FARMS, INC.
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 1054

[ February 1, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Joseph Marx , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50 2011 CA 003488

XXXX MB

.

J ennifer B. Carroll and George L. Sigalos of Simon & Sigalos, LLP, Boca Raton, for appellant s

.

Paul O. Lopez and Rachel R. Bausch of Tripp Scott, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

C IKLIN
, L EVINE and K LINGENSMITH , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-77-01-SM

Johnell Bennett

O R D E R

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

trial is granted (document 26). Trial has been rescheduled for the January 2008

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

later than November 13, 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: December 17, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. 

Jury Selection: January 8, 2008 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00077-SM Document 27 Filed 10/29/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

October 29, 2007

cc: Kevin E. Sharkey, Esq.

Mark Zuckerman, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00077-SM Document 27 Filed 10/29/07 Page 2 of 2
IIB

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1937

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 12, 2001

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to engage in

certain feasibility studies of water resource projects in

the State of Washington.

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

HR 1937 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pacific Northwest Fea3 sibility Studies Act of 2001’’.

4 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF FEASIBILITY STUDIES.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior may

6 engage in the following feasibility studies:

7 (1) The Tulalip Tribes Water Quality Feasi8 bility Study, to identify ways to meet future domes9 tic and commercial water distribution needs of the

10 Tulalip Indian Reservation on the Eastern Shore of

11 Puget Sound, Washington.

12 (2) The Lower Elwha Klallam Rural Water

13 Supply Feasibility Study, to identify additional rural

14 water supply sources for the Lower Elwha Indian

15 Reservation on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington.

16 (3) The Makah Community Water Source

17 Project Feasibility Study, to identify ways to meet

18 the current and future domestic and commercial

19 water supply and distribution needs of the Makah

20 Indian Tribe on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington.

21 (b) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF RESULTS.—The Sec22 retary of the Interior shall make available to the public,

23 upon request, the results of each feasibility study author24 ized under subsection (a), and shall promptly publish in
3

HR 1937 RFS

1 the Federal Register a notice of the availability of those

2 results.

Passed the House of Representatives September 10,

2001.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6753

DANIEL LEVERN STALEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARION COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; W. T. JOHNSON, Director, Marion County Detention Center; REGINA REED; ROSE BETHEA; RENEE CAESAR; OFFICER CAMPBELL; BETTY GAUSE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (9:06-cv-03207-PMD) Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 26, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Levern Staley, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Daniel Levern Staley appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Staley that failure to file timely and specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Staley failed to file specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Staley has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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. AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of M Power Entertainment Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     .    The Quarterly Report for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the "Form
           10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
           Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

     .    the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in
           all material respects, the financial condition and results of
           operations of the Company.



Date: May 15, 2006



/s/  Gary F. Kimmons
----------------------
Gary F. Kimmons
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer