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

     

       
Exhibit 10.24




AMENDMENT NUMBER I 
TO THE
KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
2014 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


The Keysight Technologies, Inc. 2014 Deferred Compensation Plan  (the  "Plan"), effective August 1, 2014, is hereby amended as follows effective October 24, 2014:
In Appendix A, of the Plan and any accompanying references throughout the Plan, references to the "Vanguard Balance Index Fund - Signal Shares" are deleted in their entirety and replaced with "Vanguard Balanced Index Fund - Admiral Shares".
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Keysight Technologies, Inc. has caused this Amendment Number 1 to the Plan to be executed in its name and behalf on this 6th day of November, 2014, by its officer thereunto duly authorized.


												
				KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
				/s/ Ingrid Estrada
				Ingrid Estrada
				Senior Vice President of Human Resources
				Keysight Technologies, Inc.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1043 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to prohibit with limited 

exceptions the participation of any Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House on the board of any publicly 

held or publicly regulated corporation, financial institution, or business 

entity. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 21, 2018 

Miss RICE of New York (for herself and Mr. REED) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

prohibit with limited exceptions the participation of any 

Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or 

employee of the House on the board of any publicly 

held or publicly regulated corporation, financial institution, or business entity. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 

3 Rule XXV of the Rules of the House of Representa4 tives is amended by adding at the end the following new 

5 clause: 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1043 IH 

1 ‘‘Conflict of interest 

2 ‘‘9. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, of3 ficer, or employee of the House may not serve as an officer 

4 or member of the board of any publicly held or publicly 

5 regulated corporation, financial institution, or business en6 tity. The preceding sentence shall not apply to service of 

7 a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or 

8 employee as— 

9 ‘‘(a) an officer or member of the board of an organi10 zation which is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) 

11 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, if such service is 

12 performed without compensation; or 

13 ‘‘(b) an officer of member of the board of an institu14 tion or organization which is principally available to Mem15 bers, Delegates, Resident Commissioner, officers, or em16 ployees of the House, or their families, if such service is 

17 performed without compensation.’’. 

18 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

19 The amendment made by section 1 of this resolution 

20 shall take effect immediately before noon, January 3, 

21 2019. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14 as adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Vu Truong, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Aridis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and

 

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.

 
|                  | /s/ Vu Truong                                                               |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | Vu Truong                                                                   |
| April 18,   2019 | Chief Executive Officer   (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

1

----
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE REVOCATION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY OF SCHAPER DISPOSAL WORKS, INC.

October 13, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 3.3



FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE SECOND AMENDED AND
RESTATED BYLAWS



This is the FIRST AMENDMENT
TO THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS (this “Amendment”) of FREEDOM CAPITAL CORPORATION, a Maryland
corporation (the “Corporation”) adopted by the Corporation’s board of directors (the “Board”)
on March 15, 2016.



WHEREAS, the Board
adopted the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Corporation on March 4, 2015;



WHEREAS, the Board
adopted the Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Corporation on September 9, 2015 (the “Bylaws”);
and



WHEREAS, the Board
desires to amend the Bylaws in order to revise Article XI, Section 3(a) of the Bylaws to comply with the North American Securities
Administrators Association Omnibus Guidelines and to be consistent with Section 7.3 of the Corporation’s Articles of Amendment
and Restatement.



NOW, THEREFORE,
in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows:



| | 1. | Amendment and Restatement of Article XI, Section 3(a).
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------



Article XI, Section 3(a) of
the Bylaws is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:



| | (a) | There has been a successful adjudication on the merits of each count involving alleged securities
law violations as to the Indemnitee,
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Adopted by the Board: March
15, 2016
Order entered August 27, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00969-CR

PAUL HARVEY ANDREWS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-11-49282-T

ORDER

The Court has before it appellant Paul Harvey Andrew’s motion to extend time to file his 

reply brief until September 26, 2014. Because this case is set for submission on September 24, 

2014, we GRANT appellant’s motion only to the extent he has until September 14, 2014 to file a 

reply brief.

/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et seq.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 12, 2010.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago**                     (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:                

*1. First State Associates, Inc.,*                     Hawarden, Iowa; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Farmers State Holding Company, Marion, South Dakota, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Farmers State Bank, Marion, South Dakota.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 14, 2010.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2010-26285 Filed 10-19-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors 

Metaldyne Performance Group Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-200871) on Form S-8 of Metaldyne Performance Group Inc. of our reportdated March 16, 2015, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Metaldyne Performance Group Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income(loss), stockholders’ equity (deficit), and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 and the period from October 6, 2012 through December 31, 2012, and the related financial statement schedule, which reportappears in the December 31, 2014 annual report on Form 10-K of Metaldyne Performance Group Inc. We did not audit the financial statements and financial statement schedule of ASP HHI Holdings, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary, which financialstatements reflect total assets constituting 45% as of December 31, 2013 and net sales constituting 45% and 91% for the year ended December 31, 2013 and the period from October 6, 2012 through December 31, 2012, respectively, ofthe related consolidated totals. Those financial statements and financial statement schedule were audited by other auditors whose report has been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts included for ASP HHI Holdings,Inc., is based solely on the report of the other auditors. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Detroit, Michigan 

March 16, 2015
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Alpha Investment Inc. f/k/a Gogo Baby, Inc.  (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Todd C. Buxton, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.
|  

 

 

Date: February 15, 2018

 

By: /s/ Todd C. Buxton

 

 

Todd C. Buxton

 

 

Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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

|                |   |                                                      |   |
|---------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated: May 13, 2011 | By:    | /s/GREGGORY SCHNEIDER                                     |   |
|                |   | Greggory Schneider                                        |   |
|                |   | Director, Chief Financial and Principal Financial Officer |   |
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, David W. Brooks, II, Chief Financial Officer of Main Street Banks, Inc. (the Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance
with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       |  |     |  |                                             
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: November 7, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ DAVID W. BROOKS, II                     
|                       |  |     |  | David W. Brooks, II, Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ALBERTO FELL.

December 8, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 12, 2015

t0609

Order 

Clerk

June 12, 2015

150642

JAMES H. DILUIGI and KRISTA J. DILUIGI,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 150642

COA: 310886

St Clair CC: 11-000815-CH

RBS CITIZENS N.A., f/k/a CHARTER ONE

BANK, N.A. and FREDDIE MAC,

Defendants-Appellants, 

and

CCO MORTGAGE, 

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 9, 2014 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals. 

The Court of Appeals erred in holding that a genuine issue of material fact existed 

regarding notice. To the extent that the Court of Appeals rested its holding on the 

proposition that MCL 600.3204(4)(a), as amended by 2009 PA 29, requires a borrower to 

receive actual notice of his or her right to seek a home loan modification, see MCL 

600.3205a to MCL 600.3205d [repealed by 2012 PA 521], the Court of Appeals is 

mistaken. As Judge Riordan’s dissenting opinion correctly observes, MCL 600.3205a(3) 

simply requires that notice be given “by regular first-class mail and by certified mail, 

return receipt requested, with delivery restricted to the borrower, both sent to the 

borrower’s last known address.” Because it is undisputed that defendants complied with 

the statutory requirements by providing plaintiffs with both forms of mailed notice, 

summary disposition in favor of defendants was proper. For these reasons, we 

REINSTATE the May 31, 2012 judgment of the St. Clair Circuit Court that granted the 

defendants’ motion for summary disposition.
#### Carlye CHRISTIANSON, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 99-70911.

Tax Ct. No. 14283-97.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Dec. 5, 2000.

Decided Jan. 11, 2001.

Before GOODWIN, HUG, and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM1

Appellant Carlye Christianson (“Chris-tianson”) appeals the tax court’s decision affirming the government’s assessment of tax fraud penalties against her under 26 U.S.C. §§ 6653(b) and 6651(f). Christian-son contends that the tax court erred in applying such penalties because the government failed to carry its burden of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence. We have jurisdiction to review the final order of the tax court under 26 U.S.C. § 7482, and we reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we will not repeat it here except as necessary to explain the disposition.

We review the tax court’s finding of fraud for clear error. *Lord v. Commissioner,*525 F.2d 741, 742 (9th Cir.1975). The Commissioner bears the burden of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence. I.R.C. § 7454(a); *Bradford v. Commissioner,*796 F.2d 303, 307 (9th Cir. 1986). In the context of the penalty at issue, fraud is a taxpayer’s intentional wrongdoing with the specific intent to avoid a tax that she knew was owing. *Akland v. Commissioner,*767 F.2d 618, 621 (9th Cir.1985). Such intent can be inferred from strong circumstantial evidence, but cannot be sustained when we are left with only a suspicion of fraud. *See id.*

Although we agree that the tax court correctly noted the “badges of fraud” *705that this court has previously identified to infer fraudulent intent, the facts do not show clear and convincing evidence of fraud on Ms. Christianson’s part. *See Laurins v. Commissioner,*889 F.2d 910, 913 (9th Cir.1989). Accordingly, the decision of the tax court allowing fraud penalties is REVERSED.2

1

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

2

. We address only the issue of fraud as that is all that is before us. Although Ms. Christian-son made reference to the statute of limitations as a bar to negligence penalties, as the government noted in its brief on appeal and at oral argument, there has been no assessment of negligence penalties.
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Jugal K. Taneja, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of DrugMax, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
quarterly report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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
quarterly report;



4. The registrants other certifying
officer(s) and I am 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 quarterly report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant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
financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other
certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the 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 function):



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 control over financial reporting.



|Dated: August 13, 2003 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Jugal K. Taneja                    
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Jugal K.
Taneja Chief Executive
Officer