alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w2



 






EXHIBIT 10.2




THIRD AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT




     THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is
made and entered into effective the 20th day of May, 2004, by and between
TRIVEST VANCE JACKSON LP, a Texas limited partnership (“Purchaser”), and S/M
REAL ESTATE FUND VII, LTD., a Texas limited partnership (“Seller”).



     TRIVEST RESIDENTIAL LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“TriVest”) and
Seller entered into that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated effective
February 20, 2004 (as previously amended, the “Agreement”), which Agreement was
subsequently assigned by TriVest to Purchaser, for the sale of that certain
property located in San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas known as Fifth Avenue
Apartments (the “Property”). Purchaser and Seller now desire to amend the
Agreement as hereinafter provided.



     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and for other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:



     1. Closing Date. The parties agree that the Closing Date and Closing (as
defined in Section 6.1 of the Agreement) are hereby extended and will occur on
Wednesday, May 26, 2004, unless otherwise agreed by the parties in writing.



     2. Defined Terms. Terms defined in the Agreement shall have the same
meaning when used in this Amendment.



     3. Ratification. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Amendment, the Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed and shall continue in
full force and effect in accordance with its terms.



     4. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in identical
counterparts, which when taken together shall constitute one and the same
instrument. A counterpart transmitted by facsimile shall be deemed an original
for all purposes.



[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]




 









 








     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the
date first written above.



PURCHASER:



TriVest Vance Jackson LP,

a Texas limited partnership



By: TriVest Vance Jackson GP LLC,

a Texas limited liability company,

its General Partner



      

	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:  	                           /s/ Dean J. Lontos
 	 
	 	 	Dean J. Lontos, Manager 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 




SELLER:



S/M REAL ESTATE FUND VII, LTD., a Texas

limited partnership



By: SM7 Apartment Investors, Inc., a Texas

corporation




      

	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:  	                                     /s/ Richard Hoffmann
 	 
	 	 	Richard Hoffmann, President
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 407 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                 House Calendar No. 167
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 407

                          [Report No. 105-488]

 Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 111) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 1998

Ms. Pryce of Ohio, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 111) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 111) 
proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
respect to tax limitations. The joint resolution shall be considered as 
read for amendment. The amendment specified in the report of the 
Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as 
adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
joint resolution, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) three hours of 
debate on the joint resolution, as amended, which shall be equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on the Judiciary; (2) one motion to amend, if offered by 
the Minority Leader or his designee, which shall be considered as read 
and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
                                     





                                                 House Calendar No. 167

105th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 407

                          [Report No. 105-488]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 111) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 21, 1998

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Transportation.

# ACTION:

Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2014-10-25); Docket DOT-OST-2014-0020.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Transportation is directing all interested persons to show cause why it should not issue an order finding Gem Air, LLC fit, willing, and able, and awarding it commuter air carrier authority to conduct scheduled commuter service.

# DATES:

Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than November 13, 2014.

# ADDRESSES:

Objections and answers to objections should be filed in Docket DOT-OST-2014-0020 and addressed to Docket Operations, (M-30, Room W12-140), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Barbara Snoden, Air Carrier Fitness                               ( print page 65475)                            Division (X-56, Room W86-9721), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4834.                    

Susan L. Kurland,

Assistant Secretary, for Aviation and International Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2014-26186 Filed 11-3-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-60200

Summary Calendar

 

GARY A. STAATS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SHIRLEY S. CHATER,

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:95-CV-28-LN

- - - - - - - - - -

September 17, 1996

Before Judges WISDOM, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Gary A. Staats appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social

Security’s determination that Staats was not entitled to disability insurance benefits under 42

U.S.C. § 405(g). Staats raises four issues on appeal. First, Staats argues that the Administrative

Law Judge (ALJ) improperly used the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, rather than relying on
No. 96-60200

- 2 -

1 Greenspan v. Shalala, 38 F.3d 232, 236 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct.

1984 (1995).

2 Fraga v. Bowen, 810 F.2d 1296, 1304 (5th Cir. 1987).

3 Greenspan v. Shalala, 38 F.3d 232, 237 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct.

1984 (1995); Scott v. Heckler, 770 F.2d 482, 485 (5th Cir. 1985).

vocational expert testimony. Second, Staats argues that there was not substantial evidence to

support the ALJ's finding of no disability. Third, Staats argues that the ALJ erred in giving no

weight to a report from Staats’s regular treating physician. Fourth, the Appeals Council erred in

not considering new evidence submitted with Staats’s request for review. 

The scope of review applicable to this case is limited to determining whether the findings

of the Commissioner are supported by substantial evidence, and whether the Commissioner

applied the proper legal standard.1 This Court has carefully reviewed the record in this case and

the briefs of the parties. Our review reveals no error. First, The ALJ’s finding that Staats’s

nonexertional impairments did not affect his residual functional capacity for the full range of

sedentary work is supported by substantial evidence, therefore, the ALJ was entitled to rely

exclusively on the Medical-Vocational Guidelines.2 Second, the medical records from the treating

physician contained only a few objective findings, and these findings primarily concerned

treatment after the expiration of Staats's insured status, therefore, the ALJ properly gave them no

weight.3 Third, the Appeals Council carefully considered the new evidence submitted by Staats

and found no basis for changing the ALJ’s decision. Staat’s assertion that this evidence was not

considered has no basis in fact. 

Accordingly, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Nicholas Lee Cooper,

Defendant.

No. CR-16-08004-01-PCT-JJT

DETENTION ORDER

On October 25, 2019, Defendant appeared before this Court on a petition for 

revocation of supervised release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The 

Court considered the petition and file in determining whether Defendant should be released 

on conditions set by the Court.

The Court finds that Defendant, having previously been convicted and placed on 

supervised release, and having appeared before the Court in connection with a petition to

revoke his supervised release, has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that 

he is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of the community if released pursuant 

to Rule 46(d), and Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and 18 U.S.C. §

3143.

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

Dated this 25th day of October, 2019.

Honorable Eileen S. Willett

United States Magistrate Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

INVENTUS POWER, INC., and 

ICC ELECTRONICS (DONGGUAN) LTD., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SHENZHEN ACE BATTERY CO., LTD., 

Defendant. 

Case No. 1:20-cv-03375 

Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr. 

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey 

Cummings 

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWN MOTION 

Defendant Shenzhen Ace Battery Co., Ltd. (“Defendant”) respectfully withdraws its 

Request for Mediation and Motion to Stay Proceedings (Dkt. No. 247). 

Date: June 8, 2022 Respectfully submitted 

Shenzhen Ace Battery Co., Ltd. 

By: /s/ He Cheng 

He Cheng 

Robin.Cheng@glacier.law 

Tao Liu 

Tao.Liu@glacier.law 

Glacier Law LLP 

200 Park Avenue, Suite 1703 

New York, NY 10166 

(332) 208-8882

Attorneys for Defendant

Case: 1:20-cv-03375 Document #: 252 Filed: 06/08/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:6333
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this June 8, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing with 

the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, along with the attached Exhibits, and service was 

perfected on all counsel of record and interested parties through this system, which will deliver a 

true and correct copy of the foregoing documents via CM/ECF. 

Date: June 8, 2022 /s/ He Cheng 

 He Cheng 

Case: 1:20-cv-03375 Document #: 252 Filed: 06/08/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:6334
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
(the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below
and 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, as amended,
and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Registrant. May 7, 2004
    
    /s/ Thomas J. Corcoran, Jr.
Thomas J. Corcoran, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer of FelCor Lodging
Trust Incorporated, as general partner of
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 217 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 217

 Recognizing the important contributions made by Americans of Austrian 
                               heritage.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 3, 1997

   Mr. Bereuter (for himself and Mr. Gilman) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International 
                               Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing the important contributions made by Americans of Austrian 
                               heritage.

Whereas the United States and the Republic of Austria have enjoyed close and 
        friendly relations since the inception of the Republic of Austria;
Whereas 1997 marks the 50th anniversary of the Marshall Plan which was 
        critically important to the reconstruction of the Republic of Austria 
        and to the establishment of friendly ties between the Republic of 
        Austria and the United States;
Whereas on September 26, 1945, a conference of representatives of the nine 
        Federal states of the Republic of Austria was held in Vienna that laid 
        the foundation for the provisional Austrian Government and the early 
        elections in November 1945; and
Whereas a number of States have already proclaimed September 26, 1997, as 
        ``Austrian-American Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) declares that the warm and cordial relations between 
        the people of the United States and the Republic of Austria 
        should grow stronger; and
            (2) acknowledges the important contributions to the United 
        States by Americans of Austrian heritage.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 99.4


     Certification  of  Chief  Executive  Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350

     In  connection with the Amended Quarterly Report of American Fire Retardant
Corporation  (the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as
filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  Raoul  L.  Carroll, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
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.



/s/  Raoul  L.  Carroll
---------------------------
Raoul  L.  Carroll
Chief  Executive  Officer

September  17,  2002



<PAGE>
9550.

#### Veal *v.*Darley.

Wade, C.' J.

An appeal to the superior court from the judgment of a justice’s court was dismissed because the affidavit in forma pauperis, given in lieu of an appeal bond, was defective. Thereafter the appellant *406moved, during the same term of the court, to reinstate his appeal and amend his affidavit, and to the judgment refusing-to reinstate the appeal he excepted. It was not contended' in the motion to reinstate, or in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, that the affidavit was not fatally defective, or that the court originally erred in dismissing the appeal, and it is clear that the court ‘did not err in refusing to grant the motion to reinstate the case.

Decided May 17, 1918.

Appeal; from Laurens superior court—Judge Kent. November 24, 1917.

*Fred Kea, Hal B.*Wimberly, for plaintiff in'error.

*Larsen & Crockett,*contra.

*Judgment' affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.*
#### Jackson McGuiar *v.*Jason Neely.

Trespass to Try Title — Compromise Line — Infants and Feme Coverts.

The compromise line established by the remote' vendors of appellee and the vendor of Mrs. Roby and her trustee, did not bind either her or her children, she being a feme covert and the children infants.

APPEAL PROM SIMPSON CIRCUIT COURT.

October 31, 1871.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The compromise line established by G. W. Hay, the remote vendor of appellee, and Karr, the vendor of Mrs. Susan Roby, and J. W. Roby, her trustee, did not bind either her or her children, she being a feme covert, and the children infants.

*602
      *Milliken & Whiteside, Bush, for appellant.*

*Craddock, Trabue, for appellee.*

Karr by his conveyance had divested himself of all interest in the land, and J. W. Roby was merely the holder of the legal title with no power to divest Mrs. Roby and her children of any portion of their estate.

Appellee McGuiar held all the land Mrs. Roby and her children had the right to convey, and was not estopped to claim to the boundaries mentioned in his deed by reason of the inoperative compromise between Hogg, Karr and Roby, the trustees.

The court below by Instruction No. 1, given at the instance of the appellee, made this compromise conclusive as to the rights of the litigants, and took away from the jury the right to make any inquiry as to the location of the true division line between these litigants.

For this error the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded, for a new trial and for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           37434
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 37434
<PP&E>                                           71164
<DEPRECIATION>                                    5930
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  102668
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         55767
<OTHER-SE>                                       46901
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    102668
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    70704
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (70704)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (70704)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (70704)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)


</TABLE>