alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
10.55


 


AMENDMENT
NUMBER ONE TO SECURITY AGREEMENT


 


This AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO SECURITY
AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), dated as of July 6, 1999, is entered
into by and between Sierra Primary Care Medical Group, Inc., a California
professional medical corporation (“Physician  Group”), and Sierra
Medical Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Manager”), with
reference to the following facts:


 


A.            Physician Group and Manager have previously
entered into that certain Security Agreement (“Physician Group”), dated as of
September 25,  1997 (as
amended from time to time, the “Agreement”);


 


B.            Physician Group and Manager desire to amend
the Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto hereby
agree as follows:


 


1.             Defined Terms.  All initially capitalized terms used but not
defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.


 


2.             Amendments to Section 1.


 


(a)           Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby
amended to add the following definition:


 


“ ‘Deposit
Account’ means any demand, time, savings, passbook or like account now or
hereafter maintained by or for the benefit of Physician Group with a bank,
savings & loan association, a credit union or like organization, and all
funds and amounts therein, whether or not restricted or designated for a
particular purpose.”


 


(b)           The definition of “Collateral” set
forth in Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety as
follows:


 


“ ‘Collateral’
means any and all of the Accounts, Deposit Accounts, and Physicians Group’s
Books, in each case whether now existing or hereafter acquired or created, and
any proceeds or products of any of the foregoing, or any portion thereof, and
any and all Accounts, money, or other tangible or intangible property,
resulting from the sale or disposition of the Accounts or Deposit Accounts, or
any portion thereof or interest therein and the


 


1

















 


substitutions, replacements, additions,
accessions, products and Proceeds thereof.”


 


3.             Reaffirmation of the Agreement.  The Agreement as amended hereby and the
Management Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have
executed and delivered this Amendment as of the date first hereinabove written.


 


	
   

  	
  SIERRA MEDICAL MANAGEMENT,

  INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
  /s/ R.
  Stewart Kahn

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
   

  	
  R. STEWART
  KAHN

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
   

  	
  Executive
  Vice Pres.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  SIERRA PRIMARY CARE MEDICAL

  GROUP, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
  /s/ R.
  Stewart Kahn

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
   

  	
  R. STEWART
  KAHN

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
   

  	
  Asst. Vice
  Pres.

  	
   

  
								



 


2
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the AnnualReport of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the periodended August 29, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven D. Hunt, Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

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

 

|   |   |                                                  |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
| By:    |   |  /s/ Steven D. Hunt                              |
|   |   |  Steven D. Hunt

* Chief Executive Officer* |

 

Date: November 13, 2009
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of XML - Global Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending
December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Simon Anderson, Chief Financial Officer and Principal 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Simon Anderson
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Mark R. Templeton, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Artisan Components, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Artisan Components, Inc.



| |  |  |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    MARK R. TEMPLETON                                                                       
| |  |  |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  |  |  |  |     |  | Mark R. Templeton President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)







I, Joy E. Leo, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Artisan Components, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Artisan Components, Inc.



| |  |  |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    JOY E. LEO                                                                                                                        
| |  |  |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  |  |  |  |     |  | Joy E. Leo Vice President, Finance and Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

) No. 20 CR 35-1

` )

v. ) Judge Elaine E. Bucklo

)

WILMER ALEXANDER GARCIA MEZA )

ORDER EXONERATING BOND

This matter coming before the Court on the government's motion and the Court being fully 

advised finds as follows:

(a) Pursuant to a Pre-Trial Release Order entered on February 6, 2020, Daisy Cortes

posted her interest in certain real property to secure the defendant=s release on bond. As a result, 

the property was encumbered pending the defendant=s completion of the bond requirements. 

(b) As the defendant was convicted, sentenced and has surrendered to the Bureau of 

Prisons, the security for the bond is no longer required and the government submitted this motion 

to exonerate the bond. In addition, the government requested that this Court order the release of 

any liens or other encumbrances lodged against the real property as it relates to this bond and 

further order that the quit claim deed executed in favor of the United States of America, currently 

held in the custody of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 

be returned to the surety at the property address.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, DIRECTED, and ADJUDGED:

1. That, as the defendant has surrendered to the Bureau of Prisons, the Court thus 

orders the bond exonerated. It is further ordered,

Case: 1:20-cr-00035 Document #: 90 Filed: 04/03/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:376
 2. That, any liens or other encumbrances lodged against the real property as it relates 

to this bond shall be released. It is further ordered,

3. That, the quit claim deed executed in favor of the United States of America, currently 

held in the custody of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 

shall be returned to the surety at the property address., It is further ordered,

4. That this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter to take such additional action 

and enter further orders as necessary to implement and enforce this order. 

ENTER:

_____________________________________ 

ELAINE E. BUCKLO

United States District Judge

DATED: ___________________ 4/3/2023

Case: 1:20-cr-00035 Document #: 90 Filed: 04/03/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:377
9458.

#### Harrell *v.*The State.

Decided April 2, 1918.

Indictment for murder; conviction of manslaughter; from Charlton superior 'court—Judge Sunnnerall. November 3, 1917.

*James R. Thomas,*for plaintiff in error.

*M. £>. Dickerson, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, P. J.

1. Under tlie particular facts of tlie case, tlie court did not err in admitting in evidence the testimony of the witness Pollard as to the alleged dying declarations of the person for whose murder the defendant was being tried; tlie evidence being admitted under appropriate instructions to the jury.

2. The following charge was not error: “Where a homicide is proven to have been committed by the person charged, with an instrument which the jury finds was, in the manner in which it was used on the occasion in question, a weapon likely to produce death, the law, from the use of such a weapon in that manner, presumes malice and the intent to kill. The presumption, however, may be overcome by the proven facts and circumstances of the ease.” *Flannigan*v. *State,*135 *Ga.*221 (4), 223 (69 S. E. 171).

3. Under the evidence and the defendant’s statement at the trial the court did not err, in the absence of a timely written request, in failing to charge the law of circumstantial evidence.

4. The evidence-for the State made out a case of murder. The defendant’s statement (he introduced' no evidence) showed a justifiable homicide. Neither the evidence nor the defendant’s statement authorized instructions upon the law of voluntary manslaughter, and it was error for the court to charge upon that subject.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Bloodworth and*Harwell, *JJ., concur.*
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Special Emphasis Panel. Methods Development in Natural Products Chemistry (SBIR/STTR).                    

*Date:*                         December 9, 2014.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Peter Kozel, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, NCCAM, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20892-5475; 301-496-8004;                         *kozelp@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health, HHS.)

Dated: November 6, 2014.

Michelle Trout,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-26751 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Exhibit 10.10FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT     THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is entered intoeffective as of February 27, 2006, by and between BioMed Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation(the “REIT”), BioMed Realty, L.P., a Maryland limited partnership (the “OperatingPartnership” and, together with the REIT, the “Company”), and Matthew G. McDevitt (the“Executive”).     WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend that certain Employment Agreement datedas of August 6, 2004, between the Company and Executive (the “Original Agreement”), tochange Executive’s position with the Company.     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the various covenants and agreements hereinafter setforth, the parties hereto agree as follows:     1. Amendment to Section 2. Section 2(a)(i) of the Original Agreement is herebyrestated in its entirety to read as follows:          “(i) During the Employment Period, the Executive shall serve as Regional Executive VicePresident of the REIT and the Operating Partnership and shall perform such employment duties as areassigned by the REIT’s Chief Executive Officer and usual and customary for such positions. In suchposition, the Executive shall report to the REIT’s Board of Directors or, if the Board of Directorsdelegates such authority, to the REIT’s Chief Executive Officer. At the Company’s request, theExecutive shall serve the Company and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates in other offices andcapacities in addition to the foregoing. In the event that the Executive, during the EmploymentPeriod, serves in any one or more of such additional capacities, the Executive’s compensation shallnot be increased beyond that specified in Section 2(b) of this Agreement. In addition, in theevent the Executive’s service in one or more of such additional capacities is terminated, theExecutive’s compensation, as specified in Section 2(b) of this Agreement, shall not be diminishedor reduced in any manner as a result of such termination for so long as the Executive otherwiseremains employed under the terms of this Agreement.”     2. No Other Amendments. Except as expressly provided for in this Amendment, no otherterm or provision of the Original Agreement is amended or modified in any respect.(Signature Page Follows)
 

 
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first set forthabove.      BIOMED REALTY TRUST, INC.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 31

In the matter of Representative Newt Gingrich.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 21, 1997

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut submitted the following resolution; which was

considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

In the matter of Representative Newt Gingrich.

1 Resolved, That the House adopt the report of the Se2 lect Committee on Ethics dated January 17, 1997, In the

3 Matter of Representative Newt Gingrich.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

------------------------------------------------------------ x

KATHY BELANGER, on behalf of herself and 

all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

IBERIA LINEAS AEREAS DE ESPANA S.A. 

OPERADORA, a foreign corporation d/b/a 

“Iberia”, 

 Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: 

: 

:

Case No. 1:20-cv-3087 

Hon. John J. Tharp, Jr. 

------------------------------------------------------------ x

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this 

Court’s August 12, 2020 Order, Defendant Iberia, Líneas Aéreas de España, S.A. Operadora, 

Sociedad Unipersonal (“Iberia”), by its undersigned counsel, hereby moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s 

Class Action Complaint and Jury Demand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to 

state a claim on which relief can be granted. Iberia incorporates, as though fully set forth herein, 

its attached Brief in Support of this Motion and the Declaration of Raj N. Shah, with its exhibits, 

which are being filed concurrently. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03087 Document #: 26 Filed: 09/14/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:116
2 

Dated: September 14, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

DLA Piper LLP (US) 

s/ Raj N. Shah 

Raj N. Shah 

444 West Lake Street, Suite 900 

Chicago, IL 60606-0089 

(312) 368-8904 

raj.shah@us.dlapiper.com 

Keara M. Gordon (admitted pro hac vice) 

Colleen Carey Gulliver (admitted pro hac vice)

William J. Diggs (admitted pro hac vice) 

1251 Avenue of the Americas, 27th Floor 

New York, NY 10020-1104 

(212) 335-4500 

keara.gordon@us.dlapiper.com 

colleen.gulliver@us.dlapiper.com 

william.diggs@us.dlapiper.com 

Haley D. Torrey (admitted pro hac vice) 

One Liberty Place 

1650 Market Street, Suite 5000 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-7300 

(215) 656-2436 

haley.torrey@us.dlapiper.com 

Attorneys for Iberia, Líneas Aéreas 

de España, S.A. Operadora, 

Sociedad Unipersonal

Case: 1:20-cv-03087 Document #: 26 Filed: 09/14/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:117
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 14, 2020, I caused a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing to be filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system. 

Notice of this filing will be sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to all counsel 

of record registered on the ECF system. 

Dated: September 14, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

DLA Piper LLP (US) 

s/ Raj N. Shah______ 

Raj N. Shah 

444 West Lake Street, Suite 900 

Chicago, IL 60606-0089 

(312) 368-8904 

raj.shah@us.dlapiper.com 

Attorneys for Iberia, Líneas Aéreas 

de España, S.A. Operadora, 

Sociedad Unipersonal

Case: 1:20-cv-03087 Document #: 26 Filed: 09/14/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:118
#### B. F. Biggs *v.*M. O. Robinson.

Receivers- — Garnishee in Another Court- — Duty.

A receiver, although, summoned as a garnishee in a suit pending in another county, is compelled to obey the orders of the court in which he was acting as such. A receiver can not be made responsible for money paid out by him under the orders of the court, although wrongfully paid.

Courts — Conflicting Jurisdiction.

Where a court has taken jurisdiction over property by the appointment of a receiver, no -other court has- the po-wer to annul or modify the orders of that court or make that court responsible for money ordered'to be paid out by its receiver, although wrongfully paid.

APPEAL PROM TAYLOR CIRCUIT COURT.

October 17, 1871.

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The money paid over under the order of court by the appellant, as shown by the record, was a fund under the control of the Green circuit court. The property was sold under a judgment of that court, and the suit in which the judgment was obtained was instituted prior to the suit in the Taylor circuit court. The receiver, although summoned as a .garnishee in the suit pending in Taylor, was compelled to obey the order of the court in which he was acting as such. The fund was rightfully in the custody of that court, and the appellant had no control whatever in directing its payment. In addition to all of this, the record shows that the appellant, before the money was paid over, reported the fact to the court that he had been summoned as garnishee in the suit pending in Taylor, and the appellee on the same day filed a petition to be made a party in the Green court to the suit there pending, claiming the fund directed to be paid over. The court refused to make the appellee a party to this action, and upon this refusal, if improper, the appellee should have appealed. It was the Green circuit court paying this money under the order alluded to, and the Taylor court had no power to annul or modify the orders of that court, or to make that court responsible for paying this money over, even if wrongfully *17paid. The judgment against the appellant is erroneous. The cause is, therefore, reversed and the same remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

*Chelf, for appellant.*

*Montague & Robinson, for appellees.*
#### STATE v. WARREN

No. 206P97

Case below: 96 N.C.App. 511

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1997. Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 June 1997.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 96-1389EA

_____________

Repoleon Gilbert, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Scott Dunn, Classification * Appeal from the United States

Officer, Delta Regional Unit, * District Court for the Eastern

Arkansas Department of * District of Arkansas.

Correction; Grant Harris, *

Warden, Delta Regional Unit, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Arkansas Department of *

Correction; Larry Norris, *

Director, Arkansas Department *

of Correction, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

 Submitted: April 7, 1997

 Filed: April 15, 1997

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Repoleon Gilbert appeals from the adverse

decisions of the magistrate judge in Gilbert’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983

lawsuit. Because Gilbert did not provide a transcript of the

evidence presented at trial, we cannot review the magistrate

judge’s findings. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Van Treese v.

Blome, 7 F.3d 729, 729 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). Given the

magistrate judge’s finding that Gilbert had not been required to

perform work beyond his physical capacity, the magistrate judge

properly rejected Gilbert’s deliberate indifference claim. See 
-2-

Choate v. Lockhart, 7 F.3d 1370, 1374 (8th Cir. 1993). Our review

of Gilbert’s other arguments reveals that they lack merit. We

affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
H. Res. 371

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

February 26, 1998.

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and that

he is hereby, elected to the following standing committee of

the House of Representatives:

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY: Mr. Graham of South

Carolina.

Attest:

Clerk.