alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w1



 




Exhibit 10.1
 
[KLA-Tencor Letterhead]

Option Grant




	 	 	 
	To:

	 	Outside Board of Director Member
	Date:

	 	[    ]







We are pleased to inform you that in accordance with the terms of the “1998
Outside Director Option Plan” you have been granted Non-Qualified Stock
Option, number XXXXXX, in the amount of 2,500 shares of KLA-Tencor Corporation
common stock at $XX.XX per share. The date of grant of the option is [    ].



100% of the shares under this option are fully vested and are exercisable on [    ].



The option will expire on [    ]. Any vested options not exercised on or
prior to the expiration date shall expire and may not be exercised. These
options will remain exercisable for 30 days from the date you terminate as a
Board Member of the company. The grant of the Option and the issuance of
Shares upon exercise of the Option are subject to compliance with all of the
applicable requirements of all federal, state, local, or other laws or
regulations with respect to such options.



For the other terms and conditions relating to your stock option, please see
the 1998 Outside Director Option Plan Document as previously furnished.



Your Option may not be amended orally. It can only be amended by means of a
written or electronically transmitted agreement between you and the company.
Questions should be directed to Tracy Laboy at (408) 875-7131



THIS MEMO IS YOUR OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION OF THIS STOCK GRANT. NO ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTATION WILL BE SENT TO YOU CONCERNING THIS GRANT.
Exhibit 31.2
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Brian D. Niebur, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 of SpectreGaming, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.   Date: March 28, 2005  /s/ Brian D. Niebur By: Brian D. Niebur Chief Financial Officer
72
Exhibit 32.2

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION - CFO

In connection with the Annual Report of Plains Exploration & Production Company
(the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Winston M. Talbert, Chief Financial 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:

To the best of
my knowledge, after reasonable investigation:



| | (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.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: February 25, 2009 |  |                        
|                         | 
|                         |  | /s/ Winston M. Talbert 
|                         |  | Winston M. Talbert     
|                         |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Leon R. Koziol, Individually, as Natural Parent of Child A and Another, and on Behalf of Parents and Children Similarly Situated, Appellant, v Martha WalshHood, Acting Judge of State of New York, et al., Respondents.

Decided September 21, 2010

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JUSTIN W. YIM,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 645 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 18th day of March, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
This diary will help you and your health care team figure out the causes of your bladder control trouble. 

The “sample” line shows you how to use the diary.

Your Daily Bladder Diary

sm med lg sm med lg

Time Drinks

 What kind? How much?

 oz, mL, cups

Trips to the Bathroom

How many How much 

 times? urine?

Accidental

Leaks

How much urine?

Did you feel 

a strong urge 

to go?

What were you doing

at the time? 

Sneezing, lifting, arriving home,

sleeping, etc.

Sample Juice 8 ounces Yes No Running

6 – 7 a.m. Yes No

7 – 8 a.m. Yes No

8 – 9 a.m. Yes No

9 – 10 a.m. Yes No

10 – 11 a.m. Yes No

11 – 12 noon Yes No

12 – 1 p.m. Yes No

1 – 2 p.m. Yes No

2 – 3 p.m. Yes No

3 – 4 p.m. Yes No

4 – 5 p.m. Yes No

5 – 6 p.m. Yes No

6 – 7 p.m. Yes No

7 – 8 p.m. Yes No

8 – 9 p.m. Yes No

9 – 10 p.m. Yes No

10 – 11 p.m. Yes No

11 – 12 mid. Yes No

12 – 1 a.m. Yes No

1 – 2 a.m. Yes No

2 – 3 a.m. Yes No

3 – 4 a.m. Yes No

4 – 5 a.m. Yes No

5 – 6 a.m. Yes No

Use this sheet as a master for making copies that you can use as a bladder diary for as many days as you need.

I used pads today. I used diapers today (write number).

Questions to ask my health care team:
EX-10.2






CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY

AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE CONTRACT




Escrow No. 2719994 Date: October 31, 2007



The Terms and Conditions of the Purchase Agreement / Escrow Instructions are hereby modified
as follows:




	 	1.	 	Pursuant to Section 7(g) of that certain Sale Agreement and Instructions dated
October 19, 2007 (the “Purchase Agreement”) by and between 2001 W. Orange Grove
Road, LLC, PVP Investments, LLC, WRM Investments, LLC, EDI Baptist, LLC, and SOD
Investments, LLC (collectively, “Seller”), and Triple Net Properties, LLC
(“Buyer”), Seller and Buyer agreed to agree on a form of Ground Lease Estoppel Certificate
(as defined in the Purchase Agreement) by October 31, 2007 (“Estoppel Termination
Date”). Since the parties require additional time to agree on a form of Ground Lease
Estoppel Certificate, both Seller and Buyer have agreed to extend the Estoppel Termination
Date to Friday, November 2, 2007.





This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,

but all of which shall be considered one and the same instrument.




All other Terms and Conditions shall remain the same.



	 	 	 
	 	 	“BUYER”
	“DESERT LIFE SELLER”

2001 W. ORANGE GROVE ROAD, LLC,

an Arizona limited liability company

By: William R. Metzler, Manager

	 	TRIPLE NET PROPERTIES, LLC,

a Virginia liability company

By: /s/ Jeff Hanson

Name: Jeff Hanson

Title: Chief Investment Officer
	PVP INVESTMENTS, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company

By: James D. Vandever, Sole Member

	 	





	WRM INVESTMENTS, LLC,

an Arizona limited liability company

By: William R. Metzler, Administrative Member

	 	





	EDI BAPTIST, LLC,

an Arizona limited liability company

By: Scott O. Douglas, Managing Member

	 	





	“LA CHOLLA SELLER”

WRM INVESTMENTS, LLC,

an Arizona limited liability company

By: William R. Metzler, Administrative Member

	 	







	SOD INVESTMENTS, LLC,

an Arizona limited liability company

By: Scott O. Douglas, Sole Member
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 998 

To include the State of Idaho as an affected area under the Radiation 

Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note). 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 11, 2005 

Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. CRAIG) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To include the State of Idaho as an affected area under 

the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 

2210 note). 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF IDAHO IN RADIATION EXPO4 SURE COMPENSATION. 

5 Section 4(b)(1) of the Radiation Exposure Com6 pensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘and’’ 

8 after the semicolon; and 

9 (2) by adding after subparagraph (C) the fol10 lowing: 
2 

•S 998 IS 

1 ‘‘(D) the State of Idaho; and’’. 

Æ
#### State v. Jacobs

Case below: 174 N.C. App. 1

No. 617A05

1. AG’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA04-541)

2. AG’s Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

3. AG’s NOA (Dissent)

4. AG's PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

5. Def’s (Bruce L. McMillian) PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA04-541)

1. Allowed Pending determination of the State’s PDR 360 N.C. 178

2. Allowed 12/19/06

3. _

4. Allowed 12/19/06

5. Denied 12/19/06

Timmons-Goodson, J., Recused
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    <title>Diabetes in America - NIDDK</title>
    
<meta name="VIcurrentDateTime" content="638490783372883878" />
<meta name="VirtualFolder" content="/" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js"></script>

</head>
<body>
    <div></div>
</body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6764

GARY B. WASHINGTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD HUTCHINSON, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL

FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge.

(CA-02-3973-WDQ)

Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: December 29, 2005

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Howard Margulies, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. John Joseph

Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Gary B. Washington seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Washington has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-10516

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL HICKMON, also known as Slizzard,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CR-373

- - - - - - - - - -

October 20, 1999

Before JONES, WIENER, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

 Michael Hickmon’s court-appointed appellate attorneys have

moved to withdraw as counsel and have filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Hickmon has

received a copy of counsels’ motion and brief but has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsels’ motion

to withdraw is GRANTED. Counsel is excused from further 
No. 

-2-

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH

CIR. R. 42.2.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roque CORTINAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-41150

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 7, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Roque Cortinas, Pharr, TX, pro se.

Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Damian Orozco, counsel for Roque Cortinas, has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Cortinas has not responded to counsel’s motion. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and this appeal is DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
Exhibit 23




                         Consent of Independent Auditors



The Board of Directors
Midwest Bancshares, Inc.:


We consented to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement No.
33-65598 on Form S-8 of Midwest Bancshares, Inc. of our report dated January 22,
1999,  except for note 16,  which is as of  February  2, 1999,  relating  to the
consolidated  balance sheets of Midwest Bancshares,  Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related  consolidated  statements of income,
changes in shareholders' equity and comprehenive income, and cash flows for each
of the years in the  three-year  period ended  December  31, 1998,  which report
appears  in the  December  31,  1998,  annual  report on Form  10-KSB of Midwest
Bancshares, Inc.


 /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Des Moines, Iowa
March 26, 1999
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Health Information 

# How Do We Hear?

Hearing depends on a series of complex steps that change sound waves in the air into electrical signals. Our auditory nerve then carries these signals to the brain. Also available: Journey of Sound to the Brain, an animated video.
                    - Sound waves enter the outer ear and travel through a narrow passageway called the ear canal, which leads to the eardrum.
                    - The eardrum vibrates from the incoming sound waves and sends these vibrations to three tiny bones in the middle ear. These bones are called the malleus, incus, and stapes.
                    - The bones in the middle ear amplify, or increase, the sound vibrations and send them to the cochlea, a snail-shaped structure filled with fluid, in the inner ear. An elastic partition runs from the beginning to the end of the cochlea, splitting it into an upper and lower part. This partition is called the basilar membrane because it serves as the base, or ground floor, on which key hearing structures sit.
                    - Once the vibrations cause the fluid inside the cochlea to ripple, a traveling wave forms along the basilar membrane. Hair cells—sensory cells sitting on top of the basilar membrane—ride the wave. Hair cells near the wide end of the snail-shaped cochlea detect higher-pitched sounds, such as an infant crying. Those closer to the center detect lower-pitched sounds, such as a large dog barking.
                    - As the hair cells move up and down, microscopic hair-like projections (known as stereocilia) that perch on top of the hair cells bump against an overlying structure and bend. Bending causes pore-like channels, which are at the tips of the stereocilia, to open up. When that happens, chemicals rush into the cells, creating an electrical signal.
                    - The auditory nerve carries this electrical signal to the brain, which turns it into a sound that we recognize and understand.

For more information, contact us at:

**NIDCD Information Clearinghouse**1 Communication AvenueBethesda, MD 20892-3456Toll-free voice: (800) 241-1044Toll-free TTY: (800) 241-1055Email: nidcdinfo@nidcd.nih.gov

May 2015

* Note: PDF files require a viewer such as the free Adobe Reader.

March 16, 2022

## Language

          - English
          - Español

- Download PDF version
- Order free publications
- Find organizations
- Syndicate content

## News

                - Too loud and too bright! - NIH MedlinePlus Magazine   (03/28/2024)
                - Deep neural networks show promise as models of human hearing Massachusetts Institute of Technology  (12/13/2023)
                - Loss of auditory nerve fibers uncovered in individuals with tinnitus Massachusetts Eye and Ear  (11/30/2023)

More News

## Have a question?

Information specialists can answer your questions in English or Spanish.

Voice: (800) 241-1044TTY: (800) 241-1055nidcdinfo@nidcd.nih.gov

More Info
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 41 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 41

Recognizing the sacrifices being made by the families of members of the 
   Armed Forces and supporting the designation of a week as National 
                        Military Families Week.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 9, 2005

   Mr. Hagel (for himself and Mr. Martinez) submitted the following 
  concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed 
                                Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Recognizing the sacrifices being made by the families of members of the 
   Armed Forces and supporting the designation of a week as National 
                        Military Families Week.

Whereas the people of the United States have a sincere appreciation for the 
        sacrifices being made by the families of members of the Armed Forces 
        while their loved ones are deployed in the service of their country;
Whereas military families face unique challenges while their loved ones are 
        deployed because of the lengthy and dangerous nature of these 
        deployments;
Whereas the strain on military family life is further increased when these 
        deployments become more frequent;
Whereas military families on the home front remain resilient because of their 
        comprehensive and responsive support system;
Whereas the brave members of the Armed Forces who have defended the United 
        States since September 11, 2001, continue to have incredible, unending 
        support from their families; and
Whereas the week of June 12, 2005, has been proposed to be designated as 
        National Military Families Week: Now, therefore be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) recognizes the sacrifices of military families and the 
        support they provide for their loved ones serving as members of 
        the Armed Forces; and
            (2) supports the designation of a week as National Military 
        Families Week.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Sylvie Grimm, Respondent, v State of New York Division of Housing and Community Renewal Office of Rent Administration, Appellant, and 151 Owners Corf., Intervenor-Appellant.

Submitted July 26, 2010;

decided August 26, 2010

Motion by Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc. for leave to appear amicus curiae on the appeal herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 2 7 , 2021

NO. 03

- 19

- 00868

- CV

Ryan Goyal , Appellant

v.

Henna Hora , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, TRIANA, AND SMITH

A FFIR MED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the final decree of divorce signed by the tr i a l court on Augus t 2 9, 2019

.

Having r eviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no

reversible error in the trial court’s judgment

. Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s

judgment

. A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court

below.