alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3(c)


                                  AMENDMENT TO
                               HEXCEL CORPORATION
                              INCENTIVE STOCK PLAN


I.         Purpose

         This Amendment (the  "Amendment") to the Hexcel  Corporation  Incentive
Stock Plan, as  previously  amended and restated on January 30, 1997 and further
amended on December 10, 1997 and March 25, 1999 (as so amended and restated, the
"Plan"), amends the Plan on the terms provided herein.


II.        Amendment to Capital Stock Subject to the Provisions of this Plan

(a) Unless otherwise  defined herein,  capitalized terms that are defined in the
Plan are used herein as defined therein.

(b) Section V(a) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated as follows:

         "The  capital  stock  subject to the  provisions  of this Plan shall be
shares of authorized  but unissued  Common Stock and shares of Common Stock held
as treasury  stock.  Subject to adjustment in accordance  with the provisions of
Section XI, and subject to Section V(c) below,  the maximum  number of shares of
Common Stock that shall be available  for grants of Awards under this Plan shall
be 6,691,251."


III.       Effective Date of Amendment

         This Amendment became effective upon the approval thereof by the Hexcel
Corporation Board of Directors on December 2, 1999.



                               HEXCEL CORPORATION


                                                By:  /s/ Ira J. Krakower
                                                Name:    Ira J. Krakower
                                                Title:   Senior Vice President



                                      130
<PAGE>
#### HARLAND DEAN CAMPBELL v. CITY OF HIGH POINT

No. 438A01

(Filed 18 December 2001)

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 144 N.C. App. 493, 551 S.E.2d 443 (2001), affirming an order for summary judgment signed 4 April 2000 by Albright, J., in Superior Court, Guilford County. Heard in the Supreme Court 10 December 2001.

*Skager Law Firm, by Philip R. Skager, for plaintiff-appellant.*

*Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, by Gusti W. Frankel and Alison R. Bost, for defendant-appellee.*

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-12-00614-CR

IN RE Wilbert P. STEWART

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 10, 2012

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On September 24, 2012, relator Wilbert P. Stewart filed a petition for writ of mandamus, 

complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus.

However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in 

the trial court for which he is currently confined. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid 

representation. See Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. 

State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on 

pro se motions or petitions filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is 

represented by counsel. See Robinson, 240 S.W.3d at 922. Consequently, the trial court did not 

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2012-CR-6387, styled State of Texas v. Wilbert P. Stewart, pending in the 

187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Raymond Angelini presiding.
04-12-00614-CR

- 2 -

abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator’s pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus filed 

in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
Exhibit 32.1



Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of CarrAmerica Realty Corporation (the Company), each hereby certifies that, to
his knowledge on the date hereof:



|(a) | the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/    Thomas A. CarrThomas A. Carr Chief Executive
OfficerMay 3, 2004/s/    Stephen E. RiffeeStephen E. Riffee Chief Financial
OfficerMay 3, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE TRUSTS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         140    
<SECURITIES>                                     0    
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0    
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0    
<INVENTORY>                                      0    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               140    
<PP&E>                                       87276    
<DEPRECIATION>                               45181    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               42235    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            0    
<BONDS>                                          0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0    
<PREFERRED>                                      0    
<COMMON>                                         0    
<OTHER-SE>                                   42235    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 42235    
<SALES>                                          0    
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              9905    
<CGS>                                            0    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0    
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               419    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  0    
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              0    
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0    
<CHANGES>                                        0    
<NET-INCOME>                                  9486    
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0    
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0    
                                           

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      106
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   106
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7098
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2673
<OTHER-SE>                                      (9665)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       106
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   106
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     8014
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (7908)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (7908)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (7908)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Less than .01 per share.
</FN>


</TABLE>
www.nasa.gov

 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Preparation Tool – Exploration of Relevant Test Environments 

Prior to engaging with NASA programs that offer access to relevant test environments, it is 

useful for principal investigators (PIs) to consider a few key elements/questions so that they can 

get the most out of their conversations with NASA personnel. (This tool is also useful for 

conversations with commercial providers.) Even if you cannot address every point below, 

understanding where there are still gaps in your planning is useful.

We encourage researchers to be prepared to discuss:

• A high-level overview of the technology 

o How do you help people outside of your field understand what your technology is 

designed to do?

• The technology’s relevance to key NASA gaps

• The current technology readiness level (TRL), including:

o Has a benchtop unit or prototype been developed?

o What type of testing have you performed to date?

• The environment in which the technology will ultimately be used

o Consider the key characteristics of this environment and the biggest potential 

challenges to the technology’s functionality both at the destination and in transit.

• How the findings from testing in a relevant environment will be used

o How will the data you collect impact your technology development plan?

• Optimal timing for testing in a relevant environment

o Consider when the technology will be developed enough to benefit from testing 

while not so far down the development path that test results will be difficult to 

incorporate.

o Are there any critical components or subsystems that could be tested separately 

from the full system or before the full technology is developed?

o Think about the biggest risks or obstacles that exist on the path between where 

the hardware is now and what is required to operate in the flight test 

environment.

There are a wide variety of ways to access relevant environment test opportunities within NASA. 

The list below includes a small selection of these opportunities that can serve as a good starting 

point:

• NASA’s Flight Opportunities program

• NASA’s Tipping Point / Announcement of Collaboration Opportunity (ACO)

• International Space Station

• ISS National Laboratory
<PAGE>   1



                  HAMILTON BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
                    CALCULATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
              (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)


EXHIBIT 11



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                             Three Months Ended                Nine Months Ended
                                                                September 30,                     September 30,
                                                       ----------------------------        ------------------------
                                                           1998             1997             1998            1997
                                                       ----------         ---------        ---------      ---------
<S>                                                    <C>                <C>              <C>            <C>      
         Basic

         Weighted average number of
           common shares outstanding                   10,046,377         9,827,949        9,960,679      8,462,114

         Net income                                        $5,685            $4,630          $16,144        $11,193

         Basic earnings                                     $0.57             $0.47            $1.62          $1.32

         Diluted:

         Weighted average number of
           common shares outstanding                   10,046,377         9,827,949        9,960,679      8,462,114

         Common equivalent shares
           outstanding - options                          431,260           371,156          375,520        371,156

         Total common and common
           equivalent shares outstanding               10,477,637        10,199,105       10,336,199      8,833,270

         Net income                                        $5,685            $4,630          $16,144        $11,193

         Diluted earnings per share                         $0.54             $0.45            $1.56          $1.27



</TABLE>


                                                                              28
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2267 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 30, 2004 

Referred to the Committee on Small Business 

AN ACT 

To amend section 29(k) of the Small Business Act to 

establish funding priorities for women’s business centers. 

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 cited as the ‘‘Women’s Sustain5 ability Recovery Act of 2004’’. 
2 

S 2267 RFH 

1 SEC. 2. WOMEN’S BUSINESS CENTERS. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 29(k) of the Small Busi3 ness Act (15 U.S.C. 656(k)) is amended— 

4 (1) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the 

5 following: 

6 ‘‘(C) FUNDING PRIORITY.—Subject to 

7 available funds, and reservation of funds, the 

8 Administration shall, for fiscal year 2004, allo9 cate— 

10 ‘‘(i) $150,000 for each eligible wom11 en’s business center established under sub12 section (b), except for centers that request 

13 a lesser amount; 

14 ‘‘(ii) from the funds reserved under 

15 paragraph (4)(A), not more than $125,000 

16 to each eligible women’s business center es17 tablished under subsection (l); and 

18 ‘‘(iii) any funds remaining after allo19 cations are made under clauses (i) and (ii) 

20 to new eligible women’s business centers 

21 and eligible women’s business centers that 

22 did not receive funding in the prior fiscal 

23 year under subsection (b).’’; and 

24 (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by adding at the end 

25 the following: 
3 

S 2267 RFH 

1 ‘‘(v) For fiscal year 2004, 48 per2 cent.’’. 

3 (b) SUNSET DATE.—The amendments made by sub4 section (a) are repealed on October 1, 2004. 

Passed the Senate April 29, 2004. 

Attest: EMILY J. REYNOLDS, 

Secretary.
#### STATE v. BARKLEY

No. 437A01

Case below: 144 N.C. App. 514

Motion by the Attorney General to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 4 October 2001.
EXHIBIT 31.3



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) OR RULE 15D-14(A)

PROMULGATED UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



I, William D. Young, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A of ViroLogic,
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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|Date: April 29, 2005   
|                       
|/s/ William D. Young   
|William D. Young       
|Chief Executive Officer
#### First Data Merchant Services Corp., Plaintiff, v One Solution Corporation, Doing Business as Simply One Solution, Doing Business as Joe Momma Computers, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, et al., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff. American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc., Doing Business as American Express Merchant Services, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent, et al., Third-Party Defendants.

[789 NYS2d 198]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant third-party plaintiff One Solution Corporation, doing business as Simply One Solution, doing business as Joe Momma Computers, appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Schellace, R.), entered July 30, 2003, which is in favor of the third-party defendant American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc., doing business as American Express Merchant Services and against it on the counterclaim of that third-party defendant in the principal sum of $37,138.29.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a new hearing and determination before a different referee.

In this action, the order of reference of the Supreme Court, *535Nassau County, entered November 7, 2002, authorized the Referee to hear and determine the accounting issues pertaining to the counterclaim of the third-party defendant American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc., doing business as American Express Merchant Services (hereinafter Amex), for chargebacks pursuant to CPLR 4317 (b). Since the scope of a referee’s duties are defined by the order of reference *(see*CPLR 4311; *Rihal v Kirchhoff,*274 AD2d 567 [2000]; *Al Moynee Holdings v Deutsch,*254 AD2d 443 [1998]; *Lloyds Bank v Kahn Lbr. & Millwork Co.,*220 AD2d 645 [1995]), the Referee was without authority to determine the issue of liability between Amex and the defendant third-party plaintiff One Solution Corporation,doing business as Simply One Solution,doing business as Joe Momma Computers. Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed and the issue of an accounting remitted to a different referee for a new hearing and determination.

The appellant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Santucci, J.P., Luciano, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.32.1


                                 FIRST AMENDMENT
                           to the Bowater Incorporated
                        Equity Participation Rights Plan
                           Amended and Restated as of
                                February 26, 1999

         WHEREAS, Bowater Incorporated, a Delaware corporation (the "Company")
established the Bowater Incorporated Equity Participation Rights Plan (the
"Plan") on January 17, 1996, and subsequently amended and restated the Plan as
of January 1, 1999, and again on February 26, 1999; and

         WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to correct an
inadvertent misstatement in the Plan.

         NOW THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended effective November 1, 1999,
by replacing Section 10 with the following:

"10.     CHANGE IN CONTROL

         Upon the occurrence of a Change in Control all Equity Participation
Rights shall become immediately exercisable and shall be deemed exercised in
full for cash at the Acceleration Price, which amount shall be paid by the
Corporation within a period of thirty days following a Change in Control."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to be
executed by its duly authorized officer this 22nd day of November, 1999.

                                       BOWATER INCORPORATED



                                       By:  /s/ James T. Wright
                                            ------------------------------------
                                                James T. Wright

                                       Title:   Vice President - Human Resources
#### The State, on the Relation of M‘Gillycuddy, *v.*Vananda and Others.

*Thursday, July*18.

A sheriff, having collected money on an execution, died without having paid over the money, and the judgment was afterwards reversed. *Held,*that a suit on the sheriff’s bond, on the relation of the execution-d.efendant, against the sureties of the sheriff for the money so collected, would not lie.

ERROR to the *Allen*Circuit Court.

Süklivan, J.

— Debt on a sheriff’s bond against the defendants as the sureties of one Swinney, deceased. The gravamen of the action is, substantially, that *Swinney,*on, &c., being the sheriff of *Allen*county, collected from the relator, *MLGilly cuddy,*th%, sum of 38 dollars and 57 cents, by virtue of an execution issued from the *Allen*Circuit Court in favour of one *Margaret Forsythe;*that after the money was so collected, the judgment on which the execution issued was reversed by the Supreme Court; that, previously to the reversal, *Swinney*died without having paid over the amount collected to the execution-plaintiff, or without having paid it into Court; and that the same is unlawfully withheld from *the*relator. General demurrer to the declaration, and judgment for the defendants.

This case does not involve the question whether the relator, on a proper case made, cannot recover from the representatives of *Swinney*the money collected and not paid over by him on the judgment named in the declaration. The only question is, whether the facts show that the deceased sheriff was guilty of a violation of his official bond. We are of opinion they do not. He collected the money in the regular discharge of the duties of his office, on an execution in favour of a third person to whom the money rightfully belonged until the reversal of the judgment. Until that event happened, the relator had no claim on *Swinney,*nor after it happened would his claim be admitted in a Court of justice without notice and demand. If the relator has a right to a restoration of the money, it is because events have transpired since the death of *Swinney*that give him the right, and not because *Swinney,*at any *time*while he was in office, was guilty of any dereliction of duty of which he can complain. This suit therefore cannot be maintained, ■ and the judgment must be affirmed.

*215
      *D. II.*Colerick, for the plaintiff.

*R.*Braclcenridge, for the defendants.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is affirmed at the costs of the relator.
EXHIBIT 31.3

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) OR RULE 15D-14(A)

PROMULGATED UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I,
William D. Young, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A of Monogram Biosciences, 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.



|                                         |  | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | 
|Date: April 29, 2008                    
|                                        
|/s/ William D. Young                    
|William D. Young Chief Executive Officer