alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
leds-ex1015_67.htm



 

Exhibit 10.15

 

 

AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE UNSECURED PROMISSORY NOTE

 

This Amendment to Convertible Unsecured Promissory Note (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of May 26, 2021 (“Effective Date”) by and between SemiLEDs Corporation (“Borrower”) and Simplot Taiwan Inc. (“Lender”) (Borrower and Lender are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties”, and individually a “Party”)

WHEREAS, Borrower and J.R. Simplot Company (the “Original Noteholder”)entered into that certain Convertible Unsecured Promissory Note as of November 25, 2019 (the “Original Note”), the Maturity Date thereunder being May 30, 2021.

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2020, the Original Noteholder assigned all of its right, title and interest in and to the Original Note to Lender.

WHEREAS, on May 26, 2020, the Parties agreed that a portion ($300,000) of the total outstanding principal amount ($1,500,000) of the Original Note would be converted into common stock of Borrower and issued in the name of Lender.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties desire to (i) document the change of the amount of the Original Note and (ii) extend the Maturity Date of the Original Note.

 


	
1.
	
In addition to the terms defined elsewhere in this Amendment, capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Original Note.





	
2.
	
The Parties agree that the total principal amount outstanding under the Original Note is $1,200,000.





	
3.
	
The Parties agree that the Maturity Date of the Original Note is extended to May 30, 2022.





	
4.
	
Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, all other terms and conditions in the Original Note shall remain in full force and effect.





	
5.
	
This Amendment shall be deemed as an integral part of the Original Note but shall take precedence if there is any discrepancy between this Amendment and the Original Note.





	
6.
	
This Amendment may be executed, including execution by email, in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same document.




The Parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed and delivered as of the Effective Date.

 



SemiLEDs Corporation

 

By:/s/ Trung Tri Doan

Name: Trung Tri Doan

Title:C.E.O.



Simplot Taiwan Inc.

 

By:/s/ Scott R. Simplot

Name: Scott R. Simplot

Title:Director



- 1 -
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0099

IN THE MATTER OF:

JUL 27 2021

Bovven Greenwood

Clerk of Supreme Court

State nf Montana

L.Q.M., ORDER

A Youth in Need of Care.

Counsel for the appellant father of L.Q.M. filed a motion and brief asking to be

allowed to withdraw from this appeal on grounds that counsel has been unable to find any

nonfrivolous issues to raise on appeal, pursuant to § 46-8-103(2), MCA, and Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). The father was granted time to file a

response, but no response was filed.

The Court has now independently examined the record pursuant to § 46-8-103(2),

MCA, and Anders. We conclude there are no arguments with potential legal merit that

could be raised in the father's appeal in this case.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to

the appellant father personally.

DATED this di5r-of July, 2021.

Chief Justice

07/27/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0099
2••It /14 

Justiccs (Cif /

2
#### Geri Miah HARDING v. RAISING CANES USA, L.L.C. and Tim Barfield, Director, Louisiana Workforce Commission.

No. 2011-C-0766.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 27, 2011.

In re Harding, Geri Miah; —Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 671330; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 10-CA-320.

Denied.
648 A.2d 702

#### IN THE MATTER OF HARRY DREIER, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

October 6, 1994.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed a report with the Court, recommending that HARRY DREIER of WATCHUNG, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1976, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year for his misconduct in the handling of a trust, in violation of *RPC*1.1(a) (gross neglect), *RPC*1.3 (failure to act with diligence), *RPC*1.15(b) (failure to deliver property to client promptly), *RPC*1.4 (failure to communicate) and *RPC*8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with ethics authorities);

And in making its recommendation the Disciplinary Review Board having taken into account that respondent has been publicly reprimanded on three prior occasions;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review Board are adopted and HARRY DREIER is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year, effective October 31,1994, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

*46ORDERED that respondent be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Regulation 23 of the Administrative Guidelines Governing Suspended Attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Office of Attorney Ethics and the Disciplinary Review Board for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 62631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25466]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, 
and the Territory of Puerto Rico)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Monday, November 8, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Powers at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-
423-7977.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Monday, November 8, 2010, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Donna Powers. 
For more information, please contact Ms. Powers at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7977, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 
340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: October 4, 2010.
Shawn F. Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-25466 Filed 10-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
584 A.2d 241

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BARRY STELL.

June 11, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 13.2








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 20-F of Cresud
S.A.C.I.F. y A. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Matias
Gaivironsky, as Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:











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





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














Cresud S.A.C.I.F y A.October
31, 2017
By:
/s/
Matias GaivironskyMatias
GaivironskyChief
Financial and Administrative Officer





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the
extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed
by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-0463-11

JAMES TRAVIS HENDERSON, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON REHEARING OF APPELLANT’S

PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

COLLIN COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Appellant was convicted of driving while intoxicated and was sentenced to

confinement for 180 days and a fine of $2,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the

conviction. Henderson v. State, (Tex. App. — Dallas, No. 05-10-00476-CR, delivered

March 2, 2011). Appellant’s petition for discretionary review was dismissed as untimely

filed on June 22, 2011. Appellant has filed a motion for rehearing requesting
Henderson - 2

reinstatement of his petition so that it will be considered by this Court. Appellant’s

motion for rehearing is granted. His petition filed in this Court on June 1, 2011, is

reinstated as of August 24, 2011, and will be considered in accord with Tex.R.App.P. 68.

Appellant must file copies of his petition for discretionary review with this Court within

14 days of the date of this opinion. See Tex.R.App.P. 9.3(b).

Delivered August 24, 2011

Do not publish
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Phillip Merrick, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
webMethods, Inc. (the Company), has executed this certification in connection
with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004 (the
Report). The undersigned hereby certifies 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. Date: August 10, 2004
    
    
    
    /s/ PHILLIP MERRICKName: Phillip Merrick
Title:   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael McCrae, Appellant.

[774 NYS2d 708]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J.), rendered December 6, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

*295The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The credible evidence warranted the conclusion that defendant participated in the drug transaction as a steerer and lookout *(see People v Bello,*92 NY2d 523 [1998]).

Defendant’s challenge to the court’s charge requires preservation *(People v Thomas,*50 NY2d 467 [1980]), and we decline to review this unpreserved claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court’s standard instruction concerning identification by a single witness could not have suggested to the jury that identity was the only issue in the case *(see People v Fields,*87 NY2d 821 [1995]; *People v Harris,*271 AD2d 258 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 853 [2000]; *People v Feliz,*251 AD2d 134 [1998], *lv denied*92 NY2d 896 [1998]). The court thoroughly instructed the jury that the People had the burden of proving defendant’s accessorial liability beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin and Lerner, JJ.
#### Town of Walkerton et al. *v.*Fiwek, Treasurer, etc. et al.

[No. 19,607.

Filed April 1, 1963.]

*James D. McKesson,*of Walkerton, for appellants. *Parker & Parker, Bruce C. Hammerschmidt*and *Hammerschmidt & Bonewitz,*all of South Bend, for appellees.

Carson, J.

This cause having been set for argument at 10:30 A.M. (EST), March 12, 1963; the court having convened and counsel for the appellants failing* to appear and give the court the benefit of argument which they had requested, *417the court considered the matter solely upon the record and briefs heretofore filed.

It appears from the record herein that this is an appeal from an action for declaratory judgment attacking a supplementary assessment roll which created a lien upon real estate as a result of additional work performed upon a drainage ditch. The complaint shows that the “Supplemental Eeport of Appraisers” was filed in the office of the recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana, on the 29th day of July, 1958. No action was taken by way of an appeal from the filing of this report under the provisions of §27-920, Bums’ 1960 Eeplacement, which section contemplates an appeal to the circuit court of the county.

It appears that the complaint for declaratory judgment was filed on the 26th day of June, 1959, to which complaint the defendants demurred on the grounds that the plaintiffs’ complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendants, jointly or severally. The trial court sustained the demurrer, and the plaintiffs failing and refusing to amend their complaint, rendered judgment on the demurrer.

The law is well settled in this state that a complaint for declaratory judgment cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal or to furnish an additional remedy where an adequate one already exists. *Bryarly et al.*v. *State et al.*(1953), 232 Ind. 47, 111 N. E. 2d 277; *Pitzer et al.*v. *City of East Chicago et al.*(1943), 222 Ind. 93, 51 N. E. 2d 479; *Rainwater*v. *Merriman et al.*(1957), 127 Ind. App. 520, 142 N. E. 2d 467.

In *Rainwater*v. *Merriman et al., supra,*this court in applying the above rule cited *Hinkle*v. *Howard*(1947), 225 Ind. 176, 73 N. E. 2d 674, and said:

> *418“Relief under this statute (Declaratory Judgment Act) cannot be had where another established remedy is available. It is not intended to abolish the well known causes of action, nor does it afford an additional remedy where an adequate one existed before.”

The court further stated in quoting from *Bryarly et al.*v. *State et al.,*supra;

> “The declaratory judgment action may not be used as a substitute for appeal.”

We are of the opinion that the ruling of the trial court in sustaining the demurrer was proper under the above cited law, and that the judgment of the trial court should be and is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cooper, C. J., and Clements and Ryan, JJ., concur.

Note. — Reported in 189 N. E. 2d 110.
Exhibit
10.1

    


    Synposis
of Agreement between Shanghai Sunplus Communication Technology Co., Ltd. And
Huizhou Liyin Electronics Co., Ltd. – Zhangzhou JiaXun Communication Facility
Co., Ltd.

    


    


    Date
of Agreement:

    


    December
31, 2008

    


    Parties
to Agreement:

    


    
      
        	
                Seller:

              	
                Shanghai
      Sunplus Communication Technology Co., Ltd., a 95% Chinese subsidiary of
      T-Bay Holdings, Inc. (“Sunplus”)

              
	 	 
	Purchaser:	Huizhou
      Liyin Electronics Co., Ltd.
(“Huizhou”)


      

    

     

    Terms:

    


    Sunplus
is selling 100% interest of its wholly-owned subsidiary Zhangzhou JiaXun
Communication Facility Co., Ltd. to Huizhou at a price of RMB5,000,000, with an
initial payment of RMB500,000 to be paid within two days of the date of the
agreement and the remaining balance of RMB4,500,000 to be paid within three
months of the completion of the transaction.  The transaction is
expected to be completed by March 2009.
Exhibit 34.11












Report of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm





Board of Directors
Situs Holdings, LLC



We have examined management's assertion,
included in the accompanying Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria (“Management's Assertion”),
that Situs Holdings, LLC (the “Company”) complied with servicing criteria set forth in Items 1117, 1119, 1122(d)(3)(i),
1122(d)(4)(1) and 1122(d)(4)(vii) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB included in Appendix A as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2015, with respect to the Company's Operating or Trust Advisor Services performed over the deals
listed in Appendix B (the “Platform”). Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing
criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the Platform based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the Services and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination was not designed to detect material noncompliance
that may have occurred prior to the period covered by this report and that may have affected the Company's activities with respect
to the Platform during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management’s
assertion that Sims Holdings, LLC complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended December
31, 2015, for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.







Kansas City, Missouri 
February 18, 2016
| (logo) WELLS 

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 **ANNUALSTATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreementdated as of June 1, 2014, by and among WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGESECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asMaster Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, SITUS HOLDINGS, LLC,as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as CertificateAdministrator, as Tax Administrator, and Custodian, and WILMINGTON TRUST,NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as Trustee, with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2014-LC16 (the "Agreement"). Capitalizedterms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Leslie Hayton,Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.      A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during theperiod from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”),and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made undermy supervision, and

 

2.      To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the MasterServicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in allmaterial respects throughout the the Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2019.

 

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

LeslieHayton

ManagingDirector

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 6 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, November 3, 2010.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Timothy Shepard at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6095

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Area 6 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Wednesday, November 3, 2010, at 1 p.m. Pacific Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Timothy Shepard. For more information, please contact Mr. Shepard at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6095, or write TAP Office, 915 2nd Avenue, MS W-406, Seattle, WA 98174 or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: October 4, 2010.

Shawn F. Collins,

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. 

[FR Doc. 2010-25462 Filed 10-7-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
585 A.2d 352

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ROBERT MANCINE.

July 17, 1990.

Petition for certification denied. (See 241 *N.J.Super.*166, 574 A.2d 525)
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

GELRAY M. GAINEY and ANTONISHIA )

L. FULLER-GAINEY, )

)

Appellants, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D16-3703

)

LARSON COMMUNITIES, LLC, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed May 2, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Richard A. Nielson, 

Judge.

Karmika V. Rubin of The Law Offices of 

K. V. Rubin, P.A., St. Petersburg, for 

Appellants.

George L. Hayes, III, of The Hayes Law

Group, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, SILBERMAN, and SLEET, JJ., Concur.