alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 10.25

                               SECOND AMENDMENT TO
                         SERVICES AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT

         This Second Amendment to Service and Support Agreement (the "Second
Amendment") effective as of January 1, 2000 is by and between Coast Dental
Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("CDS") and Coast Dental of Georgia, P.C.
f/k/a Coast Dental Southeast, P.A., a Georgia professional service corporation
(the "Dental Practice Entity").

                                 R E C I T A L S

         WHEREAS, CDS and Dental Practice Entity are parties to that certain
Services and Support Agreement dated as of April 1, 1998, amended on February 1,
1999 (the "Services and Support Agreement");

         WHEREAS, the Dental Practice Entity has developed a new professional
compensation plan (the "Plan");

         WHEREAS, the Plan is designed to provide incentive based compensation
to the dental professionals by aligning compensation with individual
performance;

         WHEREAS, CDS believes the Plan developed by the Dental Practice Entity
should be beneficial to CDS and CDS wants to provide the Dental Practice Entity
the ability to properly implement the Plan;

         WHEREAS, CDS and the Dental Practice Entity are now desirous of
modifying the Services and Support Agreement in accordance with the terms of the
Fourth Amendment.

         NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties agree
to modify, supplement and amend the Services and Support Agreement as follows:

         1. Recitals. The statements contained in the Recitals of facts set
forth above are true and correct and are by this reference made a part of the
Fourth Amendment.

         2. Service and Support Fee. Exhibit "A" to the Services and Support
Agreement is hereby amended to change the S & S Fee percentage to Sixty-Seven
percent (67%).

         3. Other Provisions. All of the term and provisions contained in the
Services and Support Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless
specifically modified, supplemented or amended by the Fourth Amendment.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals
on the day and year first above written.


                                        "DENTAL PRACTICE ENTITY"

                                        COAST DENTAL OF GEORGIA, P.C. f/k/a
                                        COAST DENTAL SOUTHEAST, P.A.

                                        /s/ Adam Diasti, D.D.S.
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Adam Diasti, D.D.S., President


                                       "CDS"

                                        COAST DENTAL SERVICES, INC.

                                        /s/ Terek Diasti
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Terek Diasti, Chief Executive Officer
# **Exhibit  10.3**

| **ASSIGNMENT** |
|----------------|

### ****

            For good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which each party acknowledges through their signature hereunder, Ava Rosenberg agrees to assign andtransfer and Riverbend Telecom and Riverbend agrees to accept such assignment and transfer of that certain Agent Agreement dated July 30, 2002, together with all obligations and responsibilities thereunder.

            Riverbend agrees to indemnify and hold Ava Rosenberg harmless from any residual or ongoing obligations pursuant to that Agent Agreement

                                                                       /s/ Ava Rosenberg                                                                                                       Ava Rosenberg

                                                                       /s/ Leon Nowalsky, President                                                                                      Riverbend Telecom, Inc.
#### Malchow et al. *v.*Smith et al.

(No. 25753

Decided December 26, 1935.)

*Mr. J. Harold Read,*for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. *Francis J. Cooh,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same is hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Williams, Jones, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
Thid schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Balance Sheets and  Consolidated  Statements of Income found on pages 2 and 4 of
the Company's 10-Q, and qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998                                    
<CASH>                                         1,023
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 29,221 
<ALLOWANCES>                                     335
<INVENTORY>                                   49,269 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              79,674 
<PP&E>                                        56,925  
<DEPRECIATION>                                23,759 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               121,968 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         50,655    
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0 
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                          91   
<OTHER-SE>                                    46,698   
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 121,968  
<SALES>                                       73,605 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              73,605 
<CGS>                                         54,458   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 64,677 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 261 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,937
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                6,729
<INCOME-TAX>                                   2,454
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            4,275
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                   4,275
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .46
        


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Leslye L. Grindle, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Southern Community Bancshares, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designated such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) [Omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]     c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: March 30, 2007           /s/ Leslye L. Grindle         Leslye L. Grindle    Chief Financial Officer
* After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. SeeFed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### July 15, 2008 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 07-4274 v. District of UtahJUAN CARLOS SEGOVIAAGUILAR, Defendant-Appellant. (D.C. No. 2:07-CR-102-TS-1)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before TACHA , KELLY and McCONNELL , Circuit Judges. Defendant-Appellant Juan Carlos Segovia-Aguilar pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and aggravated reentry of a deported alien. The advisory Sentencing Guidelines range was calculated at 78–97 months; Mr. Segovia--2- Aguilar requested a below-Guidelines sentence of 60 months, which was the statutory minimum for one of the counts. He was sentenced to 78 months, to be followed by 48 months of supervised release. He now challenges that sentence for substantive unreasonableness. Mr. Segovia-Aguilar concedes that the Guidelines range was correctly calculated and that the district court addressed, on the record, all of the sentencing factors raised by the defendant’s Sentencing Memorandum. He contends, however, that the 78-month sentence is substantively unreasonable, in light of his youth, lack of education, and financial support of his family in Mexico, and the “poignant” fact that he will be deported following his prison term. A correctly calculated, procedurally reasonable, within-Guidelines sentence is entitled on appeal to a presumption of reasonableness. United States v. AngelGuzman , 506 F.3d 1007 (10th Cir. 2007). While not a rubber stamp, appellate review of sentencing decisions is deferential. Mr. Segovia-Aguilar made essentially the same arguments in mitigation of his sentence to the district court that he makes on appeal, the district court accorded those arguments due consideration, and the court rendered a sentence at the bottom of the recommended range. It did not abuse its discretion.-3- The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Utah is therefore AFFIRMED

. Entered for the Court Michael W. McConnell Circuit Judge
##### 



EXHIBIT 12
 CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS (BEFORE
FIXED CHARGES) TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK
DIVIDENDS
(In thousands, except ratios)
(Unaudited)
  Three MonthsEnded
    
    
    Year Ended December 31,March 31, 2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002Fixed charges
    
    $
    65,776
    
    
    $
    235,521
    
    
    $
    106,909
    
    
    $
    44,939
    
    
    $
    58,924
    
    
    $
    164,994Preferred stock dividends
    
    
    5,064
    
    
    
    20,256
    
    
    
    20,256
    
    
    
    20,259
    
    
    
    20,273
    
    
    
    20,362Combined fixed charges and
preferred stock dividends
    
    $
    70,840
    
    
    $
    255,777
    
    
    $
    127,165
    
    
    $
    65,198
    
    
    $
    79,197
    
    
    $
    185,356Fixed charges
    
    $
    65,776
    
    
    $
    235,521
    
    
    $
    106,909
    
    
    $
    44,939
    
    
    $
    58,924
    
    
    $
    164,994Income from continuing
operations
    
    
    6,227
    
    
    
    3,843
    
    
    
    17,195
    
    
    
    39,869
    
    
    
    58,666
    
    
    
    95,246$
    72,003
    
    
    $
    239,364
    
    
    $
    124,104
    
    
    $
    84,808
    
    
    $
    117,590
    
    
    $
    260,240Ratio of income from
continuing
operations to combined
fixed charges and preferred
stock dividends
    
    
    1.02:1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1.30:1
    
    
    
    1.48:1
    
    
    
    1.40:1Deficiency of income from
continuing operations to
combined fixed charges and
preferred stock dividends
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    16,413
    
    
    $
    3,061
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02753-RPM

ISSA H. A. CARSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CENTURA HEALTH CORPORATION, LITTLETON ADVENTIST HOSPITAL, 

 

Defendant.

____________________________________________________________________________

ORDER FOR DISMISSAL

____________________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice [16] filed May 10, 2012, it is

ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear their own

attorneys’ fees and costs.

Dated: May 11th, 2012

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02753-RPM-KLM Document 17 Filed 05/11/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE BOYD N. BOLAND

____________________________________________________________________________ 

Civil Action: 11-cv-02765-WJM-BNB Date: May 1, 2013 

Courtroom Deputy: Julie Dynes FTR: BNB COURTROOM A-401 

 

Parties Counsel

DALIP BASANTI DezaRae D. LaCrue 

 Natalie A. Brown 

 Plaintiff(s), 

v. 

JEFFREY METCALF, M.D. Sheryl K. Bridges 

 Barbara H. Glogiewicz 

JASON ROZESKI, M.D. Kevin J. Kuhn

John P. Streelman 

PLATTE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER S. Jane Mitchell 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Mark Pestal 

 Defendant(s). 

COURTROOM MINUTES 

MOTIONS HEARING

Court in Session: 8:38 a.m. 

Appearance of counsel. 

Argument presented on [126] Motion in Limine to Preclude Disclosure of Subsequent Expert 

Witness Report Due to Inadvertent Disclosure 

ORDERED: [126] Motion in Limine to Preclude Disclosure of Subsequent Expert Witness 

Report Due to Inadvertent Disclosure is DENIED for reasons stated on the 

record. 

Argument presented on [131] Motion for Leave to Exceed Deposition Time Limit. 

ORDERED: [131] Motion for Leave to Exceed Deposition Time Limit is GRANTED. 

Parties allowed an additional 3 1⁄2 hours to question Dr. Huffman 

about matters not previous made. Deposition may occur by video conference 

and is to occur on or before June 10, 2013 in Branson or Springfield, Missouri. 

Case 1:11-cv-02765-PAB-BNB Document 155 Filed 05/01/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
* To obtain a transcript of this proceeding, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at (303) 825-6119.

Discovery deadline extended to July 2, 2013 to complete depositions. 

 

Argument presented on [135] Amended Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, and 

Motion for Immediate Hearing. 

ORDERED: [135] Amended Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, and Motion 

for Immediate Hearing is GRANTED. 

The Court finds the contract requested is relevant or reasonably calculated to 

lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, but the defendant United States of 

America is to serve the subpoena as required by the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure. 

Argument presented [137] Motion to Enforce F.R.C.P. 30(d)(1) and Request for Expedited 

Briefing. 

ORDERED: [137] Motion to Enforce F.R.C.P. 30(d)(1) and Request for Expedited Briefing 

is DENIED. 

Court in Recess: 10:05 a.m. Hearing concluded. Total time in Court: 01:27 

Case 1:11-cv-02765-PAB-BNB Document 155 Filed 05/01/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### Hutchinson *v.*Evans, Admr.

(No. 25748

Decided March 18, 1936.)

*Mr. John J. Tetlow*and *Mr. John J. Sheehan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Winfield Worline,*for defendant in error.

This cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the record of the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga county, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, it is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed on authority of *Culver et al., Exrs.,*v. *Harper,*27 Ohio St., 464; *Fox*v. *Pratt, idem,*512, and *Nichols*v. *French, Admr.,*83 Ohio St., 162, 93 N. E., 897.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
**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**





In
      connection with the Annual Report of TXP Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Robert Christopher Ryan, Principal Accounting and Financial Officer of the
      Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





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


*/s/  Robert
                        Christopher Ryan*Robert
                        Christopher RyanChief
                        Financial Officer*(Principal
                        Accounting and Financial
                        Officer)*


April
      16,
      2008
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 153 

To provide for the monitoring of the long-term medical health of firefighters 

who responded to emergencies in certain disaster areas and for the 

treatment of such firefighters. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mrs. BOXER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

FEBRUARY 5, 2007 

Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for the monitoring of the long-term medical 

health of firefighters who responded to emergencies in 

certain disaster areas and for the treatment of such 

firefighters. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be referred to as the ‘‘Healthy Fire5 fighters Act’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

S 153 CDS

1 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress makes the following findings: 

3 (1) Firefighters from the San Jacinto Ranger 

4 District responded to the Esperanza Incident wild5 fire in southern California in October of 2006. 

6 (2) Five firefighters from the San Jacinto 

7 Ranger District lost their lives as a consequence of 

8 fighting that fire. 

9 SEC. 3. MONITORING AND TREATMENT OF FIREFIGHTERS 

10 IN DISASTER AREAS. 

11 (a) IN GENERAL.—The United States Fire Adminis12 tration, after consultation with the National Institute for 

13 Occupational Safety and Health, shall— 

14 (1) contract with an appropriate, locally based 

15 medical research university to conduct long-term 

16 medical health monitoring of those firefighters who 

17 responded to emergencies in any areas referred to in 

18 subsection (b); and 

19 (2) in consultation with the Secretary of Health 

20 and Human Services, provide for the treatment of 

21 firefighters described in paragraph (1) who suffer 

22 health-related conditions as a result of responding to 

23 such emergencies. 

24 (b) AFFECTED FIREFIGHTERS.—An area referred to 

25 in this subsection is any area which is declared a disaster 

26 area by the Federal Government. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

S 153 CDS

1 (c) HEALTH MONITORING.—The long-term health 

2 monitoring referred to in subsection (a) shall include— 

3 (1) pulmonary illness, neurological damage, and 

4 cardiovascular damage; and 

5 (2) exposure documentation. 

6 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

7 are authorized to be appropriated to the United States 

8 Fire Administration to carry out this section, such sums 

9 as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2007 through 

10 2011. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 13.2**

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

In connectionwith the Annual Report of Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo– Sabesp (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31,2017, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Rui de Britto Álvares Affonso, Chief FinancialOfficer and Investor Relations Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes Oxley Act of2002, that to the best of my knowledge:  

(i)                  the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)                the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  April26,****2018

By:         /s/ Rui de BrittoÁlvares Affonso      

Name:    Rui deBritto Álvares Affonso

Title:     Chief Financial Officer and Investor Relations Officer