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



---

---

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 6-K

REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the month of March, 2004

Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc.




(Translation of Registrants Name Into English)


Canadian Pacific Tower, Ste 1600, 100 Wellington Street W., Toronto, Ontario M5K 1B7, Canada




(Address of Principal Executive Offices)


(Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual
reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F.)

Form 20-F   o
    
    Form 40-F   x


(Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the
information contained in this form is also thereby furnishing the information
to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934.)

Yes   o
    
    No   x


(If Yes is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the
registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b):
82-.

This report furnished on Form 6-K shall be incorporated by reference into
each of the Registration Statements under the Securities Act of 1933 of the
registrant:   Form S-8 No.333-13960.



---

---

Page 1 of 2 Pages
Exhibits Index appears on Page 3





---



##### 



SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

FAIRMONT HOTELS & RESORTS INC(Registrant)Date:
    
    March 26, 2004
    
    By
    
    /s/   Terence P. BadourName:
    
    Terence P. BadourTitle:
    
    Executive Vice President, Law and Administrationand Corporate Secretary


2



---



##### 



Exhibits Index

The following is a list of Exhibits included as part of this Report on Form
6-K.

Exhibit No.
    
    Description of Exhibits99.1
    
    2003 Annual Report99.2
    
    Notice of Annual and Special Meeting99.3
    
    Management Proxy Circular dated March 8, 200499.4
    
    Form of Proxy99.5
    
    Confirmation of Mailing


3
EXHIBIT 21.1



CURRENT SUBSIDIARIES OF TRIZETTO



|                                            |  |             
|------------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|ENTITY NAME                                 |  | JURISDICTION
|Creative Business Solutions, Inc.           |  | Texas       
|                                            | 
|Finserv Health Care Systems, Inc.           |  | New York    
|                                            | 
|Healthcare Media Enterprises, Inc.          |  | Delaware    
|                                            | 
|HealthWeb, Inc.                             |  | Delaware    
|                                            | 
|Infotrust Company                           |  | Illinois    
|                                            | 
|Margolis Health Enterprises, Inc.           |  | California  
|                                            | 
|Novalis Corporation                         |  | Delaware    
|                                            | 
|Digital Insurance Systems Corporation       |  | Ohio        
|                                            | 
|Health Networks of America, Inc.            |  | Maryland    
|                                            | 
|Novalis Development Corporation             |  | Delaware    
|                                            | 
|Novalis Development & Licensing Corporation |  | Indiana     
|                                            | 
|Novalis Services Corporation                |  | Delaware    
|                                            | 
|Options Services Group, Inc.                |  | Illinois    
|                                            | 
|Winthrop Financial Group, Inc.              |  | Illinois    
|                                            | 
|TriZetto Application Services, Inc.         |  | Colorado    
|                                            | 
|Diogenes, Inc.                              |  | Delaware
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40092 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EDWARDO FLORES, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-96-CR-81-1

- - - - - - - - - - December 3, 1997 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Edwardo Flores appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Flores’ claim of insufficient evidence to show possession with intent to distribute is a challenge to the credibility of eyewitness testimony. This court may not substitute its credibility assessments for those of the jury. United States v. Lopez , 74 F.3d 575, 578 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 1867 (1996). This claim is without merit.No. 97-40092 -2- The evidence did not establish that Flores was less culpable than others involved in the offense. The district court did not clearly err in refusing to award a reduction in his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. See United States v. Tremelling , 43 F.3d 148, 152 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 514 U.S. 1122 (1995). Flores’ argument that he should have received a downward departure on the basis of his poor health and diminished mental capacity is not reviewable on appeal. See United States v. Leonard , 61 F.3d 1181, 1185 (5th Cir. 1995). Because the district court did not misapply the sentencing guidelines, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the court’s refusal to grant a downward departure. Id .; United States v. DiMarco , 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 21.1

CAI INTERNATIONAL, INC.

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



|                                                 |  |               
|------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------
|Subsidiary                                       |  | Jurisdiction  
|Container Applications International (U.K.) Ltd. |  | United Kingdom
|Sky Container Trading, Ltd.                      |  | United Kingdom
|Sky Domestic Container Leasing, Ltd.             |  | United Kingdom
|Sky Container Trading, Inc.                      |  | California    
|Container Applications (Malaysia) SDN BHD        |  | Malaysia      
|Container Applications Limited                   |  | Barbados      
|Container Applications International B.V.        |  | Netherlands   
|Container Applications International Ltd.        |  | Japan         
|CAIJ Ltd.                                        |  | Japan
Exhibit








August 17, 2015








Cancer Genetics, Inc. 
Meadows Office Complex 
201 Route 17 North, 2nd Floor 
Rutherford, NJ 07070
Attention: Mr. Panna Sharma, Chief Executive Officer
     and President


Re:    First Amendment to Amended and Restated Asset Purchase Agreement 


Dear Panna:


Reference is made to that certain Amended and Restated Asset Purchase Agreement dated August  17, 2015 (the “APA”), between Response Genetics, Inc., a Delaware corporation and Chapter 11 Debtor and Debtor in Possession in the Bankruptcy Case pending in the Bankruptcy Court (“Seller”), and Cancer Genetics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Buyer”).  Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the APA.


As discussed, Seller and Buyer wish to extend the deadline set forth in Section 7.1(h) of the APA.  Accordingly, upon, Buyer’s and Seller’s mutual execution and delivery of this letter agreement, Section 7.1(h) of the APA shall be amended by striking the phrase “5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on August 17, 2015” and inserting in its place “5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, August 20, 2015.”


Each of Seller and Buyer further acknowledges and agrees that (i) this letter agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument, (ii) a facsimile of its signature hereto or its signature hereto transmitted electronically in portable document format (PDF) shall be deemed and treated for all purposes of execution to be as valid as an original signature hereto, and (iii) except only to the extent expressly set forth herein, the APA shall be unchanged and shall remain in full force and effect.


[Signatures on next page.]











Assuming that this letter agreement accurately sets forth our understanding, please sign where indicated below on behalf of Buyer and return the signed counterpart to us.  Thank you for your cooperation and attention to this matter.


Sincerely,


Response Genetics,, Inc.,  
a Delaware corporation and Chapter 11
Debtor and Debtor in Possession




By:     /s/ Thomas Bologna    
Name:    Thomas Bologna
Title:    Chief Executive Officer




Acknowledged and agreed to effective as of the
date first written above, by:


Cancer Genetics, Inc.,  
a Delaware corporation




By:     /s/ Panna Sharma    
Name:     Panna Sharma
Title:    Chief Executive Officer and President





[Signature page to First Letter Agreement Amending the APA 
to Extend the Closing Deadline]
MIAMI 2997733.4 7933035038
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                  62,680
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           21,886
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        84,566
<PP&E>                                                 348,688
<DEPRECIATION>                                         168,550
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         264,704
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   28,136
<BONDS>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                41,042
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                              1,340
<OTHER-SE>                                             194,186
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           264,704
<SALES>                                                 29,918
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        38,566
<CGS>                                                   16,222
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           16,222
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       1,201
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (21,700)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (21,700)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (21,700)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          (   .01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (   .01)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 10.84**

 

Agreement dated November 28,2007

by and between

the Registrant and DavidG. Dickey

 
| Summary of Key  Points |
|------------------------|
|                   |
| 1.                     |   | Responsibilities |   | Current Logistics,  Customer Care, Strategic Mfg, Procurement, Legal, EH&S, and  HR/Communications organizations |
|                   |   |   |   |   |
| 2.                     |   | Title to be mutually  defined |   |   |   |   |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 3.                     |   | Corporate Officer |   |   |   | As Board of Directors  approval permits |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 4.                     |   | Base Salary |   | $350,000/yr or greater |   | Effective NLT 1/1/08 |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 5.                     |   | 2008 MIP |   | Minimum of 50% target |   |   |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 6.                     |   | 2007 MIP |   | Paid at target or  greater$135,000 or greater |   | 1Q08 (normal cycle) |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 7.                     |   | RSO’s |   | $300,000 restricted  shares |   | 2 year time vestingIssue in 1Q08 |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| 8.                     |   | Flexperq |   | Participation as  Executive Officer$32,000 |   | Effective NLT 1/1/08 |
|                   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| By:                    |   | /s/ David G. Dickey |   | By: |   | /s/ Robert L. Wood |
| Name:                  |   | David G. Dickey |   | Name: |   | Robert L. Wood |
| Date:                  |   | November 28, 2007 |   |   |   |   |

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ANTHONY McCARARY,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 23-1930

D.C. No. 3:12-cr-02476-JLS-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 17, 2024**

Before: WARDLAW, BADE, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Anthony McCarary appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 24-month sentence and supervised release conditions imposed upon 

the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291, and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand to correct the judgment. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 20 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 23-1930

McCarary contends that the district court failed to address his arguments for 

an imprisonment term fully concurrent to his state sentence and for no additional 

term of supervision. We review for plain error, United States v. ValenciaBarragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude there is none. 

Although the court did not explicitly reference each of McCarary’s contentions, it 

listened to his arguments and acknowledged the difficulty of an additional term of 

supervision. It nevertheless determined that McCarary’s breach of the court’s trust

warranted the sentence imposed. Contrary to McCarary’s contention, this 

explanation is sufficient to allow for meaningful appellate review. See United 

States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). 

The government concedes, and we agree, that there are errors in the 

conditions of supervised release included in the written judgment. We remand for 

the district court to conform the written judgment to its oral pronouncement of the 

sentence, in which it imposed “[a]ll the same terms and conditions” from

McCarary’s underlying 2012 judgment, as well as a new Fourth Amendment 

waiver condition. See United States v. Hernandez, 795 F.3d 1159, 1169 (9th Cir. 

2015) (oral pronouncement of sentence controls over inconsistent written 

judgment). The court may not reimpose standard conditions 4, 5, and 13 from the

2012 judgment, however, unless it modifies them to comport with United States v. 
3 23-1930

Evans, 883 F.3d 1154, 1162-64 (9th Cir. 2018).

AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED.
exv10w23



 





AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



     This Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of the
31st day of July, 2006 by and between SAVE THE WORLD AIR, INC. (“STWA”), a Nevada chartered
corporation, and ERIN BROCKOVICH (the “Executive”).


BACKGROUND


     A. STWA
has employed the Executive pursuant to the provisions of an Employment
Agreement between the Executive and STWA dated as of September 1, 2004 (the “Agreement”).


     B. The
term of the Agreement was previously extended to July 31, 2006.


     C. The parties desire to further extend the term of the Agreement to February 28,
2007.


     NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:


     1. Section 3
of the Agreement is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:


     “3.
Term of Agreement The Executive’s employment under this Agreement shall
commence on September 1, 2004 and, except as otherwise provided herein, shall
continue until February 28, 2007; provided, however, that thereafter, the term of this
Agreement shall automatically be extended for one additional year beyond the term
otherwise established unless, prior to such date, STWA or the Executive shall have
given a Notice of Non-Extension.”



     2. Except as hereinabove amended or modified the Agreement is and shall remain
in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.



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



SAVE THE WORLD AIR, INC.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	/s/ EUGENE E. EICHLER	 	 	 	/s/ Erin Brockovich	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Its: 
	 	Chief Executive Officer	 	 	 	ERIN BROCKOVICH
EXHIBIT 32.2   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 Annual Report of China Green Creative, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officer’s knowledge:
 
 (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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.


Dated:
March 8, 2012By:
/s/ Deng LinDeng LinChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
[Cite as State v. Conger , 2024

- Ohio

- 128.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

CLINTON COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO

,

Appellee,

- vs

-

CHRISTOPHER L. CONGER

,

Appell ant

. :

:

:

:

:

: CASE NO. CA 20 2 3

- 08

- 017

D E C I S I O N

1/16/2024

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLINTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Case No. CRI 2023

- 5080

Andrew T. McCoy, Clinton Coun t y Prosecuting Attorney, and Katie Wilkin, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Craig A. Newburger, for appellant

.

Per Curiam

.

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by

appellant, Christopher L. Conger , the transcript of the docke t and journal entries, the

tran script of proceedings and original papers from the Clinton County Court of Common

Pleas, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel.

{¶2} Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v.

California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967)

, which (1) indicates that a careful reviewClinton CA2023

- 08

- 017

- 2

- of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the trial court

prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be predicated;

(2) lists one potential error "that might arguably support the appeal," Anders , at 744, 87

S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently t o determine

whether the proceed ings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement of

appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withd raw as counsel for

appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of

both the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant.

{¶3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response

having been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error

prejudicial to appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel

for appella nt requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed

for the reason that it is wholly frivolous.

S. POWELL , P.J., M. POWELL and BYRNE

, J J., concur.

NOTICE TO THE CLERK:

Serve a copy of this decision upon appellant at: # A817997 , Christopher L. Conger, Mansfield Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 788

, Mansfield, OH 44901[Cite as State v. Conger , 2024

- Ohio

- 128.]
[904 NE2d 837, 876 NYS2d 700]

#### Carolyn Charley, Appellant, v Margaret E. Goss et al., Respondents.

Decided February 24, 2009

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Kahn Gordon Timko & Rodriques P.C.,*New York City *(Thomas B. Grunfeld*of counsel), for appellant.

*Law Offices of Brian J. McGovern LLC,*New York City *(Alison M.K. Lee*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

Defendants Howard Conroy and Margaret Goss presented prima facie evidence, including plaintiffs deposition testimony and medical records, that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Toure v*
      *751
      *Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.