alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.6


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                            HARKEN ENERGY CORPORATION



         Harken Energy Corporation, a corporation organized and exiting under
and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the
"Corporation"), does hereby certify that:

         FIRST:          The name of the Corporation is Harken Energy
                         Corporation.

         SECOND:         The first paragraph of Article Four of the Certificate
                         of Incorporation is hereby amended in its entirety as
                         follows:

                  "The aggregate number of shares which the Corporation shall
                  have the authority to issue is one hundred eighty-five million
                  (185,000,000), of which one hundred seventy-five million
                  (175,000,000) shall be designated as Common Stock of the par
                  value of One Cent ($.01) per share and ten million
                  (10,000,000) shall be designated as Preferred Stock of the par
                  value of One Dollar ($1.00) per share."

         THIRD:          The foregoing amendment to Article Four of the
                         Certificate of Incorporation was duly adopted by the
                         Corporation in accordance with the provisions of
                         Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the
                         State of Delaware.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Harken Energy Corporation has caused this
Certificate of Amendment to be signed by Larry E. Cummings, its Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary this 16th day of December, 1997.


                                   HARKEN ENERGY CORPORATION





                                   /s/ Larry E. Cummings
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Larry E. Cummings
                                   Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-QSB.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                848
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      16,200
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                        34,540
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   51,654
<PP&E>                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     51,588
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             126,304
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                       114,690
<COMMON>                        2,897,989
<OTHER-SE>                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       51,588
<SALES>                            18,460
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   18,462
<CGS>                              20,866
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      20,866
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    4,885
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         0
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (4,885)
<DISCONTINUED>                     86,232
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       81,347
<EPS-BASIC>                         .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                         .02





</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

| November 6, 2009 | By: /s/ | Michael S. Smith                    |
|------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------|
| (Date)           |         | Michael S. Smith

President

  |

 

 

 

 

 

----
**Exhibit 15.1**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors 

eLong, Inc: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-126381 ) of eLong, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated May 26, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of eLong, Inc. as of December 31, 2004 and 2005, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, shareholders’ equity and comprehensive income/(loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, which report appears in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 20-F ofeLong, Inc. 

 

KPMG 

June 29, 2006
**Exhibit 10.2**
**AMERICAN STANDARD COMPANIES INC.**
**STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN**
**ADDENDUM FOR CANADA**
This Addendum covers Options granted under the American Standard Companies Inc.Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) to participants based in Canada. Thisaddendum does not cover other benefits under the Plan consisting of StockAppreciation Rights, Restricted Units or Restricted Stock.
Options may be granted under this addendum to Participants based in Canada asfollows :
1) Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan, any exchange of sharesof Common Stock by a Participant to pay the exercise price for Optionspursuant to Section 6.4 of the Plan shall be accomplished by suchParticipant’s attestation that he or she has owned shares of Common Stockbeing used to effect the transaction for at least six months (the“Attestation Method”), rather than physically exchanging such shares topay for the Options. When the Attestation Method is used to pay theexercise price pursuant to Section 6.4, the total number of shares thatwould otherwise have been received on the exercise of the Option isreduced by the number of shares required to pay for the exercise of theOption.
2) Section 6.6 of the Plan shall not apply to Options granted toParticipants based in Canada.
3) Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan, any exchange of sharesof Common Stock by a Participant to pay taxes owed upon the exercise ofOptions pursuant to Section 10.4 of the Plan shall be accomplished by suchParticipant’s attestation that he or she has owned shares of Common Stockbeing used to effect the transaction for at least six months (the“Attestation Method”), rather than physically exchanging such shares topay the taxes. When the Attestation Method is used to pay taxes owed uponthe exercise of Options pursuant to Section 10.4, the total number ofshares that would otherwise have been received is reduced by the number of shares required to pay the taxes.
1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 95-2188 JAMES EDWARD MCGILL, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. John A. MacKenzie, Senior District Judge. (CR-94-9) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 3, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL James Edward McGill, Appellant Pro Se. James Ashford Metcalfe, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________OPINION PER CURIAM: James E. McGill appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for the return of property. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, we affirm. See Ramsden v. United States , 2 F.3d 322, 324 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 62 U.S.L.W. 3705 (U.S. Apr. 25, 1994) (No. 93-8393). On appeal, McGill seeks to remove the restraining order placed on his savings bonds subsequent to his indictment. Although the savings bonds are not tainted pro ceeds from his conviction, they are properly subject to forfeiture as substitute assets pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 982(b)(1)(A) (West Supp. 1995). In his plea agreement, McGill expressly agreed that forfeiture could be obtained against any of hisuntainted assets in the event directly forfeitable assets were unavailable. He further agreed that he would not contest efforts to forfeit such substitute assets. Furthermore, he agreed at the time of his guiltyplea to the continuing restraint of substitute assets "until the conclusion of all matters, including appeals and forfeiture proceedings, relating to this case." Although the restraining order was pl aced on McGill's savings bonds before his conviction, this court has upheld pre-trial restraints on substitute assets. See In re Billman , 915 F.2d 916 (4th Cir. 1990), cert. denied , 500 U.S. 952 (1991). B ecause the forfeiture judgment against McGill has not yet been satisfied, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to remove the restraining order placed on McGill's savings bonds. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order denying McGill's motion for the return of property. Wefurther deny McGill's motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       6,312,485
<SECURITIES>                                13,313,772
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,381,641
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,804,412
<PP&E>                                      10,192,849
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,803,285
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             108,316,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,188,409
<BONDS>                                    100,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       14,434,836
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (21,413,322)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               108,316,758
<SALES>                                      5,865,474
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,865,474
<CGS>                                        2,979,802
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,992,806
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (648,986)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,240,736
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,698,884)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,698,884)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,464,841)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.79)
        

</TABLE>
From: Viegas <gviegas1@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, October 21, 2019 3:26 PM

To: privacyframework <privacyframework@nist.gov>

Subject: NIST Privacy Framework: Preliminary Draft Comments

Hi,

My comments in attached template.

-George Viegas
Comment 

#

Organization 

Name

Submitted By 

(Name/Email)

Page 

#

Line 

# Section

Comment

(Include 

rationale for 

comment)

Suggested Change

Type of Comment 

(General/Editorial/Technical)

1 Individual George Viegas/ 

gviegas1@gmail.com

21 Table2: 

IDENTIFY

I don't see 

data 

retention 

schedule in 

this section

While we are mapping user, 

systems and data actions to the 

actual data elements gathered, it 

is crucial that we also record at 

the same time, the data 

retention for the data elements; 

Suggest adding a new subsection 

ID.IM-P9 or adding this change 

to the end of ID.IM-P8

Technical

2 Individual George Viegas/ 

gviegas1@gmail.com

22 Table 2: 

GOVERNP

I don't see a 

categorisation 

for 

organization 

approach to 

privacy of the 

employees 

differentiated 

from that of 

non 

employees

Some Privacy regulations will 

differentiate in the treatment of 

employees v/s non-employees 

from a Privacy standpoint. This 

can result in a separate data 

processing prerogative or not. I 

would amend GV.PP_P1 to read 

"data processing, individuals" to 

read as "data processing, 

individuals, employees"

3 Individual George Viegas/ 

gviegas1@gmil.com

24 Table 2: 

GOVERNP

I do not see 

any timeline 

for any of the 

sub 

categories 

here

Most privacy regulations will 

require a timeframe to respond. 

All the subcategories here can be 

achieved, but the question is can 

they be achevied in the 

timeframe defined by the 

privacy policies and procedures 

established at GV.PP-P1? 

Suggested appending "within 

approved time frame" to GV.MTP5 and GV.MT-P7
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 213

A resolution designating the majority membership on certain standing

committees of the House.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 1, 1997

Mr. PEASE submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

A resolution designating the majority membership on certain

standing committees of the House.

1 Resolved, That the following Member be, and he is

2 hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the

3 House of Representatives:

4 COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRA5 STRUCTURE: Mr. Moran of Kansas.

Æ
FILED: February 27, 2024

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 21-2275

___________________

KRISTIN COSBY,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

SOUTH CAROLINA PROBATION, PAROLE & PARDON SERVICES,

 Defendant – Appellee.

___________________

O R D E R

___________________

The court amends its opinion filed February 27, 2024, as follows:

Starting with footnote 16, the document formatting is adjusted to ensure the correct

internal cross-references between the majority and dissenting opinions.

For the Court—By Direction

/s/ Nwamaka Anowi, Clerk

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2275 Doc: 48 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 1
----

|   | “THE      SECURITIES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE ARE "CONTROL" SECURITIES      BECAUSE OF THE POSITION THE HOLDER HAS WITH THE COMPANY AS AN AFFILIATE.      AS SUCH, THEY MAY NOT BE OFFERED OR SOLD, AND NO TRANSFER OF THEM MAY BE      MADE, UNLESS (1) THEY ARE SOLD IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 144 OF THE      SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED, OR (2) THE HOLDER IS NO LONGER AN      AFFILIATE OF THE COMPANY. FURTHER, THE TRANSFER OF THE SECURITIES      REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE IS RESTRICTED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE      MAXXAM 1994 OMNIBUS EMPLOYEE INCENTIVE PLAN. A COPY OF SUCH PLAN WILL BE      FURNISHED TO THE HOLDER HEREOF WITHOUT CHARGE UPON WRITTEN REQUEST TO THE      CORPORATION AT ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS OR REGISTERED      OFFICE." |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----

|                        |   | MAXXAM      INC. |
|-----------------------------|--------|------------------|
|                        |   |             |
|                        |   | By:              | /s/      Bernard L. Birkel |
|                        |   | Name:            | Bernard      L. Birkel |
|                        |   | Title:           | Secretary |
|                        |   |             |   |
|                        |   |             |   |
| /s/      Charles E. Hurwitz |   |             |
| Charles      E. Hurwitz     |   |             |   |

----
Amendment to Investors Rights Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 AMENDMENT TO INVESTOR RIGHTS AGREEMENT 
  
 This AMENDMENT TO THE INVESTOR RIGHTS AGREEMENT dated as of August __, 2000 (the “Agreement”), by and among
Entravision Communications Corporation (“Entravision”), Univision Communications Inc. (“Univision”) and the other stockholders named therein is dated as of September 9, 2005. Terms used in this Amendment
without definition have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement. 
  
 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Agreement, 
  
 (a) from and after the earlier of (1) the fourth business day after Repurchase Agreement Date (as defined in the letter agreement between Entravision and Univision dated as of September 9, 2005) and
(2) March 26, 2006, Univision may exercise one registration right under Section 1.2 of the Agreement with respect to Univision’s Registrable Securities and on the terms and conditions otherwise set forth in the Agreement (a
“Demand Right”) on or before March 26, 2009 (the “2009 Demand Right”); and 
  
 (b) from and after the fourth business day after Repurchase Agreement Date, if Univision then beneficially owns 15% or more of Entravision Holdings (as
defined in the consent decree pursuant to which the United States Department of Justice approved Univision’s acquisition of Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation), Univision may exercise an additional Demand Right on or before March 26, 2006
(the “2006 Demand Right”). 
  
 Entravision shall
not be required to keep a registration statement relating to the 2009 Demand Right effective for more than 90 days. Entravision shall be required to keep a registration statement relating to the 2006 Demand Right effective until the later of
(i) March 26, 2006 and (ii) the 90th day after its effectiveness. Entravision acknowledges that (x) any effectiveness period shall continue to be extended as provided in Section 1.5.1 of the Agreement; (y) this
Amendment meets the conditions for an effective amendment under Section 2.7 of the Agreement; and (z) Entravision (A) does not have the right (under the Agreement or otherwise) with respect to the 2009 Demand Right to notify Univision
that Univision must exercise its demand registration rights within any specified period (B) does have the right to provide notice to Univision that it has 10 days to exercise the 2006 Demand Right. 
  
 [signature page follows] 







 In Witness Whereof, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.

  

			
	ENTRAVISION COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Walter F. Ulloa

	 	 	 Walter F. Ulloa

	 Its:
	 	 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

	
	 UNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS INC.

		
	By:	 	 /s/ Andrew Hobson

	 	 	 Andrew Hobson

	 Its:
	 	 Senior Executive Vice President and CFO
#### Mattis, Appellee, *v.*Vancil, Appellant.

(No. 2043

Decided March 2, 1949.)

*Mr. Arthur W. Meyring,*for appellee.

*Mr. D. E. Wysong,*for appellant.

By the Court.

This cause is submitted on motion of plaintiff, appellee herein, to dismiss the appeal on questions of Jaw and fact on the ground that it is not a chancery action. An examination of the record discloses that this is a civil action for the recovery of money only. The motion to dismiss the appeal on questions of law and fact will be sustained. The case will be retained as an appeal on questions of law.

The court orders a bill of exceptions, assignments of error and briefs to be filed in conformity to the provisions of Supplement to Rule VII.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Miller, P. J., Hornbeck and Wiseman, JJ., concur.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 23

- 00144

- CR

T HOMAS E DWARD D EMOPOULOS

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 355th District Court

of Hood County ( CR15115 )

August 8, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Bassel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was error in the trial court’s judgment. The judgment is modified to delete the $340

award of court costs and to strike the incorporated order to withdraw $10,340 in

funds . We further modify the bill of costs to delete the $10,000 “Criminal Fine Fee”

and to reflect a balance due of $0 . It is ordered that the judgment of the trial court is

affirmed as modified.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dabney Bassel

Justice Dabney Bassel