alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Second Amendment to the Hub and Line-Haul Services Agreement



 Exhibit 10.5 
  
 August 8, 2005 
  

VIA FACSIMILE AND DHL EXPRESS 
  

			
	 DHL Express (USA), Inc.
	  	 
	 1200 South Pine Island Road
	  	 
	 Plantation, FL 33324
	  	 


			
	 Attn:
	 	Jon Olin
	 	 	Senior Vice President
	 	 	General Counsel & Secretary

  

			
	Re:	 	Second Amendment to the Hub and Line-Haul Services Agreement, by and between DHL Express (USA), Inc. (“Groundco”) and ABX Air, Inc. (“Airco”), dated August 15, 2003
(the “Hub Services Agreement”).

  
 Dear
John: 
  
 This letter is intended to confirm the agreement
between Groundco and Airco to amend the Hub Services Agreement in order to accommodate the requirements of each other. 
  
 Unless otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Hub Services Agreement. 
  
 The Hub Services Agreement is hereby amended, modified and/or confirmed as
follows: 
  
 (a) Section 5.2 of the Hub Services Agreement
is hereby amended to provide as follows: 
  
 5.2
With respect to Section 5.2 of the Hub Services Agreement, solely during the period from July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, the maximum Base Markup that Airco can charge Groundco under the Hub Services Agreement shall be decreased
from 1.75% to 1.25%. 
  
 (b) Section 5.4 of the Hub Services
Agreement is hereby amended to provide as follows: 
  
 5.4 With respect to Section 5.4 of the Hub Services Agreement, solely during the period from July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, the maximum incremental mark-up that ABX Air can earn from the quarterly cost-related incentives
under the Hub Services Agreement shall be increased from 25% to 48.15%. 







 Jon Olin 
 August 8, 2005

 2 of 2 
  
 (c) Section 9.1 of the Hub Services Agreement is hereby amended to provide as follows: 
  
 With respect to Section 9.1, in the first sentence, delete the phrase, “three (3)” and in
lieu thereof, substitute the phrase, “four (4)”; to extend the original term of the Hub Services Agreement by one (1) additional year. 
  
 Except as amended or modified by this letter, the terms and conditions of the Hub Services Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
  
 Please acknowledge Groundco’s acceptance of the foregoing by signing and
dating both counterparts of this letter of amendment and returning one counterpart to me for my records. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	ABX Air, Inc.
	
	 /s/ Joseph C. Hete


	Joseph C. Hete
President & Chief Executive Officer


  
 ACCEPTED AND AGREED: 
  
 DHL Express
(USA), Inc. 
  

			
	By:	 	 /s/ Jon Olin


	 	 	Jon Olin
	 	 	Senior Vice President
	 	 	General Secretary & Counsel

  
 Date:
August 9, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-01-2000
<CASH>                                         266,819
<SECURITIES>                                   183,398
<RECEIVABLES>                                  259,316
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,991
<INVENTORY>                                    119,674
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               867,629
<PP&E>                                         209,905
<DEPRECIATION>                                 102,356
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,044,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          165,265
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       543,559
<OTHER-SE>                                     335,173
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,044,357
<SALES>                                        274,071
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               274,071
<CGS>                                          119,123
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,123
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                77,031
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 181
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 83,403
<INCOME-TAX>                                    25,855
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             57,548
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    57,548
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45


</TABLE>
Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS



|                                                                                                     |  |                                                                                                           |  |                                                                                                      
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|AUSTIN OFFICE: 9601 AMBERGLEN BLVD., SUITE 117 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78729 (512) 249-7000 FAX (512) 233-2618 |  | MAIN OFFICE: 306 WEST 7THSTREET, SUITE 302 FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-4987 (817) 336-2461 FAX (817) 877-3728 |  | HOUSTON OFFICE: 1000 LOUISIANA, SUITE 625 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5008 (713) 651-9944 FAX (713) 651-9980

Exhibit 23.1

Baseline Oil & Gas Corp.

411 North Sam Houston Parkway East, Ste 300

Houston, Texas 77060

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The undersigned consents to the use of the name Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc and to the inclusion of our evaluation summary, dated
February 13, 2009, of the Baseline Oil & Gas Interests  Proved Reserves for Matagorda and Stephens Counties, Texas as of December 31, 2008 (the Reserve Report) as Exhibit 99.1 in the Annual Report on Form
10-K of Baseline Oil & Gas Corp.

We further consent to the use of information from our Reserve Report in the sections Items
1 and 2. Business and Properties  Natural Gas and Oil Reserves and Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of the Annual Report on 10-K of Baseline Oil & Gas
Corp.



LOGOCawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.Kenneth J. Mueller, P. E.Vice President


Fort Worth, Texas

March 31, 2009
No. 15,077.

#### Reynolds *v.*Quick.

Chattel *Mortgage.*— Recording.—As between the mortgagor and the mortgagee or the latter’s assignee, it is not necessary to record a chattel mortgage. As between them it is valid without recording.

*Same.*— Receiver.—If a petition to foreclose a chattel mortgage shows that the mortgagor is insolvent, that the mortgaged property is not sufficient in value to secure the debt, and that there is danger of its removal 'beyond the jurisdiction of the court, it is sufficient to authorize the appointment of a receiver of such property.

From the Warren Circuit Court.

*J. M. McCabe*and *E. F. McCabe,*for appellant.

McBride, J.

This is an appeal from an order appointing a receiver for mortgaged chattels.

The suit was brought by the assignee of the mortgage, and of the notes secured thereby, against the mortgagor to collect the sum due on the notes and to foreclose the mortgage. There is no other defendant, and the notes are overdue. The appellant urges that as the complaint does not show that the mortgage was recorded within ten days it is void, *317and that, as a consequence, the assignee acquired no interest or right in the mortgaged property entitling him to a receiver.

Filed May 21, 1891.

So far as the parties to a chattel mortgage are concerned, recording is not necessary to its validity. The statute provides only, that if not recorded it shall not be valid as against any other person than the parties thereto. The mortgagor can take no advantage of a failure to record it. Section 4913, R. S. 1881; *McTaggart*v. *Rose,*14 Ind. 230.

The appellant also insists that sufficient reasons are not shown in the petition to authorize the appointment of a receiver. The petition shows the insolvency of the debtor; that the mortgaged property is not sufficient in value to secure the debt, aud that there is danger of its removal beyond the jurisdiction of the court. This is sufficient.

The court did not err in appointing the receiver.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                             NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 26, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Kevin S. Royal, Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely
for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code,
that to the best of my knowledge:

      (1)   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.

Dated: August 5, 2004                    By: /s/ Kevin S. Royal
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Kevin S. Royal
                                             Vice President and Chief
                                             Financial Officer
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Wanda Slack, :

Appellant :

:

v. : No. 231 C.D. 2020

:

Frederick J. Slack, Jr., :

and James D. Lonergan :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, May 26, 2021

, having considered A ppellant ’ s application for

reargument and A ppellee s ’ answer in response thereto , the ap plication is denied.
Exhibit 32.1

NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Richard S. Hill, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code,
that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                   |  |     |  |                                                                                             
|------------------ |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 5, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/ Richard S. Hill                                                                         
|                   |  |     |  | Richard S. Hill                                                                             
|                   |  |     |  | Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive
Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
#### Mary C. Stow, etc., *v.*Edward Curd, etc.

Executors and Administrators — Settlement.

. Statement of manner of charging and crediting an estate in making settlement.

APPEAL FROM MeCRAOKEN CIRCUIT COURT.

January 6, 1873.

*258Response by

Judge Lindsay:

In response to the petition by appellants for a modification of the opinion herein rendered December 16, 1872, we state that the responsibility of Thompson’s estate to account for one-sixth of the profits realized by him on the sales of land to innocent purchasers, does not turn upon the fact that there was no necessity for the sale to Curd. The fact was alluded to as tending to render more conclusive the presumption that the sale was not made in good faith in the exercise of the power conferred by Sledd’s will. •

If it had been characterized by good faith, and Thompson had not himself been interested as a purchaser, he would not have incurred liability, although there was no necessity for making it. The one-sixth of the amounts realized by the sales with legal interest thereon is the true criterion of the recovery, and as there is nothing in the record showing that any of the land was sold for less than its actual value at the time, this will place appellants in statu quo and they can ask nothing more.

We are satisfied that, by the opinion, Thompson’s estate must be credited with the amount received from Curd and paid out for the benefit of Sledd’s devisees in ascertaining the profits for which said estate is to account, as requested by appellees in their petition for a modification. We give the manner in which the account should be stated.

First. Charge Thompson’s estate with the one-third of the amount for which each tract of the land sold, with interest from the time the money was paid to' him, or the payments became due and commenced bearing interest.

Second. Credit his estate with the $666.66, the amount paid to him by Curd, and allow him interest thereon from' the time he charged himself with such sum as the guardian for Seaton Sledd’s heirs.

For one-half the amount remaining after deducting the credit so made up, Thompson’s estate should account.

In making this settlement due regard should be paid to the manner in which the former settlements of Thompon, as executor, and the auditor’s report in this case were made up.

The creditors’ report shows upon its face that it is based upon the settlements of Thompson with the Calloway County Court, and *259the inventory and sale bills reported by him. None of these papers are in the record1; hence we cannot determine whether or not it will be necessary to modify in any particular the basis of settlement herein suggested.

*P.*Palmer, *for appellants.*

Bigger, Moss, *for appellees.*

If it be necessary, of course the circuit court will make the necessary modification.
Order entered October 3, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-13-01295-CV

IN RE CATENARY GROUP, LLC, ET AL., Relators

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-06312-D



### ORDER

Based on the Court’s opini on of today’s date, we DISMISS relators’ petition for writ of

mandamus and DENY their motion for emergency temporary relief. We ORDER that relators

bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE
Exhibit 99.3
                                                                    ------------


                              MANAGEMENT ASSERTION

For the period of January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, the servicing of
consumer finance receivables owned by BMW Vehicle Owner Trust 2004-A has been
conducted by BMW Financial Services NA, LLC, in its capacity as servicer, in
compliance with the servicing standards in all material respects, set forth in
Articles IV and V of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated May 1, 2004.

By:   BMW Financial Services NA, LLC

By:    /s/  Kerstin Zerbst
      --------------------------------
       Kerstin Zerbst
Title: CFO
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 18, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50580

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LONNIE ALBERT BURKE, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:99-CR-28-SS-ALL

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Lonnie Albert Burke,

Jr., has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Burke has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly,

counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
EXHIBIT 32

                          TEMPCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                            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 on Form 10-Q of Tempco, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Stanley L. Schloz, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, 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.

By:   /s/ Stanley L. Schloz
      ---------------------
      Stanley L. Schloz
      President,Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
      May 12, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                               24,504,346              26,844,897
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0                       0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                                  0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,504,346              26,844,897
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0                       0
<PAYABLES>                                     354,049                 503,043
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                   0                       0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,150,297              26,341,854
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,504,346              26,844,897
<TRADING-REVENUE>                              159,325               1,244,212
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                           128,173                 137,457
<COMMISSIONS>                                  229,650                 397,757
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                  697,815                 707,117
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<COMPENSATION>                                       0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                755,663               1,691,029
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     755,663               1,691,029
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   755,663               1,691,029
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     7.09                   13.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     7.09                   13.88
        

</TABLE>
A

A

A

A

A

A

A A A

A A A

A A A

A

Y W A

A A A

W

W

Y Y W

Y A

Y A Y A

A Y A A
A

A Y Y

W

A

W A Y

W

A W

A A

A Y

A

A

W w

A w w W

A Y W

A W

A w

A Y Y
w

A

w

A

w w

w w w

A

Y

A W

A Y

A

A Y Y W w

w w

w w
w

w

A Y

A

w

A Y

w

W

W

Y w w w

w

Y w

w w

w w

w

w w Y

A w
w

W w w

w

Y w w

w

w

A

Y

w

w

w

w Y w

A

Y

A A

A Y w

w
Y

w

w

w

w

A

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

A w
Y

w

Y w

w

w

Y w

W w

w

w

A w w

w w w

w

w

w
w

A w

w

A Y

w

Y

w

w

w

A

w w

w w

w

w

A

w w

w w
A

A

A Y

A Y

A

Y Y

A Y