alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment No. 6 to Advisory Agreement



 Exhibit 10.63 
 AMENDMENT NO. 6 
 TO 
 ADVISORY AGREEMENT 
 This amendment no. 6 to the Advisory Agreement dated as of November 8, 2006 (the
“Advisory Agreement”) between KBS Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), and KBS Capital Advisors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Advisor”), is entered as of
October 26, 2007 (the “Amendment”). Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meaning set forth in the Advisory Agreement. 
 WHEREAS, upon the terms set forth in this Amendment, the Advisor has agreed to amend and restate Article 16 of the Advisory Agreement and advance funds to the Company upon the terms set forth below. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree that Article 16
of the Advisory Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
 ADVANCE 
 Notwithstanding anything contained in Article 9 of this Agreement to the contrary, the Advisor hereby agrees to advance funds (the “Advance”)
to the Company equal to the amount by which the cumulative amount of distributions declared by the Company from January 1, 2006 through the period ending November 30, 2007 exceeds the amount of the Company’s funds from operations (as
defined by NAREIT) from January 1, 2006 through November 30, 2007. Advisor further agrees that the Company will only be obligated to reimburse the Advisor for the Advance if and to the extent that the Company’s cumulative funds from
operations for the period commencing January 1, 2006 through the date of any such reimbursement exceed the lesser of (i) the cumulative amount of any distributions declared and payable to the Company’s Stockholders as of the date of
such reimbursement or (ii) an amount that is equal to a 7.0% cumulative, non-compounded, annual return on Invested Capital for the Company’s Stockholders for the period from July 18, 2006 through the date of such reimbursement.
Advisor understands and agrees that no interest shall accrue on the Advance being made under this Agreement. 
 Signature page follows.








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

							
	KBS REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.

		 	Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., Chief Executive Officer
	
	KBS CAPITAL ADVISORS LLC
		
	By:	 	Schreiber Real Estate Investments, L.P., a Manager
			
		 	By:	 	Schreiber Investments, LLC, as general partner
				
		 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.

		 		 		 	Charles J. Schreiber, Jr., Manager
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 23890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11854]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,392]


Smead Manufacturing Company, Springfield, OH; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended, an investigation was initiated on February 25, 2009 in 
response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Smead 
Manufacturing Company, Logan, Ohio.
    The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of April 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-11854 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### Tsaiyun Ishin Phillips, Appellant, v Robert Martin Haralick, Respondent.

Submitted August 16, 2010;

decided October 21, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
**EXHIBIT
        32.1**
  
 Certificate
        of Chief Executive Officer
 **Section
        1350 Certification**
  
 In
        connection with the annual report of Nano-Proprietary, Inc. (the “Company”) on
        Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
        and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Marc W. Eller, the
        Chief 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 Date:    March
                  1, 2006
              /s/
                  Marc W. EllerMarc
                  W. EllerChairman
                  and Chief Executive
                  Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1999
AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF MARCH 31, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,596
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      879
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          19,461
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (2,270)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,747
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          5,255
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,428
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,747
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,147
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      118
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    788
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                788
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       788
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Artur GABRIELYAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-73182.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 6, 2006.*

Filed Nov. 15, 2006.

Aris Artounians, Law Office of Aris Artounians, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner.

District Director, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, James A. Hunolt, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before LEAVY, GOULD and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Artur Gabrielyan, a native of Russia and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *see Gormley v. Ashcroft,*364 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2004), and deny the petition for review.

*671The IJ did not make an express adverse credibility finding, so we accept Gabrielyan’s testimony as true. *See Kataria v.*INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1114 (9th Cir.2000). Gabrielyan failed to demonstrate that either of the attacks he suffered during his military service was based on anything other than purely personal retribution, “completely untethered to a governmental system.” *See Grava v. INS,*205 F.3d 1177, 1181 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000). Gabrielyan also did not establish that the April 2002 attack was anything more than a random criminal act. *See Gormley,*364 F.3d at 1177. Further, even if Gabrielyan’s two-day detention in March of 2002 was based on his political opinion, the IJ’s determination that Gabrielyan failed to demonstrate that this mistreatment rose to the level of persecution is supported by substantial evidence. *See Ghaly v. INS,*58 F.3d 1425, 1431 (9th Cir.1995) (persecution must be “extreme” treatment).

Finally, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Gabrielyan did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution. *See Cordon-Garcia v. INS,*204 F.3d 985, 990 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that an applicant must provide credible, direct, and specific evidence to satisfy the objective component of a well-founded fear of future persecution claim).

Because Gabrielyan failed to demonstrate he was eligible for asylum, it follows he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir .2003).

Gabrielyan’s contention that the BIA’s streamlined decision indicates the BIA did not consider his CAT claim is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 850-57 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 27, 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

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the final decree of divorce signed by the trial court on August 29, 2019.

Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no 

reversible error in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s

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

below.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Wayne CLEAVER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-40148

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 20, 2006.

Maureen Clancy Smith, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

John Wayne Cleaver, Liberty, TX, pro se.

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

John Wayne Cleaver appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute or dispense 3, 4-methylenedioxy-methamphet-amine (“MDMA” or “ecstasy”), cocaine, methamphetamine and/or gamma/hydroxy-butyrate. *See*21 U.S.C. § 846. Cleaver claims the court erred, pursuant to *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), in assessing sentencing increases for relevant conduct based upon uncorroborated statements and for his leadership role in the offense. *572Cleaver’s objections to the Presentence Investigation Report and at sentencing sufficiently apprised the court that he was making a Sixth Amendment objection to being sentenced based on facts not found by a jury. *See United States v. Akpan,*407 F.3d 360, 376 (5th Cir.2005). The increases violated Cleaver’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury, and the Government has not met its burden of demonstrating the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. *See United States v. Pineiro,*410 F.3d 282, 285-86 (5th Cir.2005).

SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.

*

 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.
SCWC-15-0000905

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

AARON DAVID PERSIN, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

STATE OF HAWAI#I; STATE OF HAWAI#I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

SAFETY; OAHU COMMUNITY CORRECTIONAL CENTER; SISAR

PADERES, M.D., Respondents/Defendants-Appellees, 

and

ALTRES STAFFING, INC., dba ALTRES MEDICAL, 

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-15-0000905; CIVIL NO. 13-1-1571-05)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Altres Staffing, Inc., dba

Altres Medical’s application for writ of certiorari filed on February

1, 2019, is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 12, 2019. 

 /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

 /s/ Paula A. Nakayama

 /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

 /s/ Richard W. Pollack

 /s/ Michael D. Wilson

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-15-0000905

12-MAR-2019

10:25 AM
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7802

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RONNIE DONTE RAND,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, 

District Judge. (5:08-cr-00329-FL-3; 5:14-cv-00238-FL)

Submitted: March 17, 2016 Decided: March 22, 2016

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronnie Donte Rand, Appellant Pro Se. Ethan A. Ontjes, Stephen 

Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys, Seth Morgan 

Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronnie Donte Rand seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

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

(2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Rand 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 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Skip to main content An icon that symbolizes the United States Department of Transportation logo. United States Department of Transportation
        Report a Safety Problem

  Toggle navigation
      National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationHomepage

    Ratings
                                Recalls
                                Risky Driving
                                Road Safety
                                Vehicle Safety
      
            More Info

                      Briefing Room
          
                        
            Importing a Vehicle
          
                                      
            
            Data
          
                        
            Research
          
                        
            Laws & Regulations
          
                    
                      Vehicle Manufacturers
                      State Governments
                      Enforcement & Justice Update on the State of the Takata Airbag Recalls | The Independent Monitor of Takata and the Coordinated Remedy Program | Fourth Report


Download file: Update on the State of the Takata Airbag Recalls | The Independent Monitor of Takata and the Coordinated Remedy Program | Fourth Report
 NHTSA Information
              
              About NHTSA
          Careers & Internships
          Contact Us
          Recall Information
          Report a Safety ProblemInformation For
              
              Vehicle Manufacturers
          State Governments
          Enforcement & JusticeNHTSA Sites
              
        SaferCar App
          TrafficSafetyMarketing.gov
          EMS.gov
          911.gov
            Website Information
              
        Web Policies & Notices
          Accessibility
          FOIA
          Privacy Policy
          Information Quality
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
          No Fear Act Data
          Ethics
          Civil Rights
          Office of Inspector General
          OIG Hotline
          BusinessUSA
          USA.gov
          WhiteHouse.gov

            National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
              1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
                Washington, D.C. 20590
              888-327-4236888-275-9171 (TTY)
              Twitter
                LinkedIn
                Facebook
                Youtube
                Instagram
        Submit Feedback >
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 101 (Thursday, May 28, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 25534]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12321]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES


Notice of Open Special Meeting of the Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory 
Committee (SAAC) of the Export-Import Bank of the United States 
(Export-Import Bank)

SUMMARY: The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee was established by 
Public Law 105-121, November 26, 1997, to advise the Board of Directors 
on the development and implementation of policies and programs designed 
to support the expansion of the Bank's financial commitments in Sub-
Saharan Africa under the loan, guarantee and insurance programs of the 
Bank. Further, the committee shall make recommendations on how the Bank 
can facilitate greater support by U.S. commercial banks for trade with 
Sub-Saharan Africa.
    Time and Place: June 3, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The meeting 
will be held at the Export-Import Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571.
    Agenda: Presentation of recently published ``U.S.-African Trade 
Profile'' by Department of Commerce; discussion and update on the 2008 
committee recommendations to U.S. Congress followed by a preliminary 
discussion on this year's recommendations including a possible sub-
Saharan Africa special initiative; and an update on the Bank's on-going 
business development initiatives.
    Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public 
participation, and the last 10 minutes will be set aside for oral 
questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written 
statement(s) before or after the meeting. If any person wishes 
auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special 
accommodations, please contact, prior to June 3, 2009, Barbara Ransom, 
Room 1241, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571, Voice: (202) 
565-3525 or TDD (202) 565-3377.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact 
Barbara Ransom, Room 1241, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20571, (202) 565-3525.

Kamil Cook,
General Counsel (Acting).
[FR Doc. E9-12321 Filed 5-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
EXHIBIT
        32b: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification
 
 Pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Earthworks Entertainment,
        Inc. (the “Company”) certifies that:
  (1)  The
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A (Amendment #2) of the Company for the period
        ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
        or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d); as
        amended; and
 
 (2)  The
        information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.
 
 
 FEBRUARY
                  13, 2006
              /s/ WILLIAM H. CAMPBELLWilliam
                  H. CampbellExecutive
                  Vice President, Chief Financial
                  Officer