alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## United States Court of App eals
F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 0- 34 17

__ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *
* App el le e, * App eal fro m th e Uni te d S ta te s * Dis tri ctCo ur t fo r th e v. * Nor th ern Dis tri ctof I owa
. * Ju li o Go nz al ez-Lo pe z, * [UNPUBLISHED] * App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _ Subm it te d: Marc h 1 8, 2 01 1 Fil ed : M arch 28 , 20 11

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re LOKEN, MURPHY, and COLLOTON, Cir cu it Ju dg es
.

__ __ __ __ __ _ PER CURI AM.
Ju li o Gon zal ez-Lo pe z pl ead ed gu il ty to il le ga ll y reen te rin g t he Uni te d S ta te s aft er h av in g b een de po rte d fol lo win g hi s pri orco nv ic ti on for an ag gr av at edfel on y , in vi ol at io n of 8 U.S.C. §§ 13 26 (a), (b)(2 ). The di st ric t co urt sen te nc edGon zal ez- 1 Lop ez t o 50 m on th s in pr is on an d two y ears of supe rv is ed rel eas e, an d he ap pe al s. Co un se l se ek s to wit hd raw, an d ha s fil ed a br ie f un de r And ers v. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 73 8 (1 96 7) , i n whi c h h e a r g ue s th at th e se nt en ce is un reas on ab le be cau se th e co ur t im pr op erl y weig he d t he sen te nc in g fa ct or s l is te d i n 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a).

The HONORABLE LINDA R. READE, Chi ef J ud ge , Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t 1 Co ur t fo r th e Nor th ern Dis tri ctof I owa
.Rev ie win g th e se nt en ce fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n, se e Gall v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2

U

. S

. 38 , 51 (2 00 7) , we co nc lu de th at Gon zal ez-Lo pe z ha s no t reb ut te d t h e pr es um pt io n of reas on ab le ne ss th at at ta ch es to hi s wit hi n- Gui de li ne s- ran ge se nt en ce,
an d we fin d no th in g su gg es ti ng an y m is ap pl ic at io n of th e se ct io n 35 53 (a) fact or s, se e Uni te d S t a t e s v. Feem st er, 57 2 F.3 d 45 5, 46 1- 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (en ba nc ); Uni te d St at es v. Garci a, 51 2 F.3 d 10 04 , 10 06 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). Fu rth er, ha vi ng rev ie wed th e
reco rdun de r Pen so n v . Ohi o, 4 88 U.S. 75 (19 88 ), we fin d n o n on fri vo lo us is su es
.
Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s jud gm en t, an d we gr an t co un se l’s

m ot io n to wit hd raw, su bjec t to co un se l in fo rm in g Gon zal ez-Lo pe z ab ou t pr oc edur es fo r se ek in g re he ari ng or f il in g a pe ti ti on forcert io rari

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos Trigueros ROJAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-14336

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

June 26, 2006.

Roland Augustine Hermida, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Susan Hollis Rothstein-Youakim, U.S. Attorney’s Office/ Middle Dist., Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Juan Carlos Trigueros Rojas appeals his sentence of 135 months of imprisonment for drug trafficking. Rojas argues that the district court clearly erred by not granting Rojas a minor-role reduction under section 3B1.2 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

Rojas was one of six crew members on a vessel that the United States Coast Guard intercepted near Colombia. The Coast Guard discovered, on the vessel and in the water around the vessel, approximately 1850 kilograms of cocaine packaged in bales. Rojas was arrested, and he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and possession of with intent to distribute, 5 or more kilograms of cocaine. 46 U.S.C. app. § 1903; 21 U.S.C. § 960(b)(1)(B)(ii).

At sentencing, Rojas objected that the presentence investigation report did not recommend a minor-role reduction under section 3B1.2 of the sentencing guidelines. Rojas asserted that, during the voyage on the vessel, he was seasick and unable to help the other drug traffickers. Rojas explained that, in contrast to his co-conspirators, he was unfamiliar with the sea. An agent of the government testified, *878based on an investigation that included interviews with the other crew members, that Rojas was a “load guard” on the vessel. The district court overruled Rojas’s objection and sentenced him to 135 months of imprisonment.

Rojas argues that the district court clearly erred by not granting him a minor-role reduction. We review “a district court’s determination of a defendant’s role in the offense ... for clear error.” *United States v. De Varon,*175 F.3d 930, 937 (11th Cir.1999) (en banc). Section 3B1.2(b) of the sentencing guidelines provides for a reduction of the offense level in the case of a defendant “who is less culpable than most other participants, but whose role could not be described as minimal.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n. 5 (2004). A “district court must measure the defendant’s role against the relevant conduct for which [ ]he has been held accountable,” *De Varón,*175 F.3d at 940, and “may also measure the defendant’s culpability in comparison to that of other participants in the relevant conduct,” *id.*at 944. “The defendant bears the burden of proving his minor role by a preponderance of the evidence.” *United States v. Boyd,*291 F.3d 1274, 1277 (11th Cir.2002).

Rojas’s argument fails. Rojas’s role as a load guard of a crew on a vessel trafficking over 1800 kilograms of cocaine cannot “be described as minimal” when measured against the conduct for which he was held accountable. Rojas also cannot be considered “less culpable” than the other crew members because he might have had less drug trafficking experience than them or was seasick.

AFFIRMED.
Document

Exhibit 10.3

CERTAIN INFORMATION IDENTIFIED WITH [****] HAS BEEN EXCLUDED FROM THIS DOCUMENT BECAUSE IT IS BOTH (i) NOT MATERIAL AND (ii) WOULD BE COMPETITIVELY HARMFUL IF PUBLICLY DISCLOSED.


Fourth Amendment to the Comdata Merchant Agreement


This Fourth Amendment (“Amendment”) is dated May 20, 2022 and constitutes an amendment to the December 15, 2010 Comdata Merchant Agreement, as modified by (i) the April 21, 2011 letter from Lisa E. Peerman to Mark R. Young, (ii) the Amended and Restated Amendment to Comdata Merchant Agreement, dated December 14, 2011, (iii) the December 4, 2020 Second Amendment to Comdata Merchant Agreement; and (iv) the April 14, 2022 Third Amendment to Comdata Merchant Agreement (collectively, the “Agreement”) by and between TA Operating LLC (“Merchant”) and Comdata, Inc., as successor in interest to Comdata Network, Inc. (“Comdata”). 
Whereas, Merchant and Comdata wish to enable Merchant to accept Comchek Direct payments;
Now, Therefore, in exchange for mutual promises and other consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:
1.Beginning on or before June 1, 2022, and for the duration of the Agreement:
a.Each Merchant site subject to the Agreement shall be enabled to accept payments via Comchek Direct;
b.Merchant shall pay to Comdata a Comchek Direct fee of $[****] per site per month;
c.The Comchek Direct fee shall be deducted from the Merchant’s first settlement of each month.  


ACCEPTED AND AGREED:


									
	TA Operating LLC (“Merchant”)		COMDATA INC. (“Comdata”)




															
	Signature:	   /s/ Lloyd B. Sanford		Signature:	    /s/ Eric Dowdell
					
	Name:	Lloyd B. Sanford		Name:	Eric Dowdell
					
	Title:	SVP Sales		Title:	President - NAT
					
	Date:	June 21, 2022		Date:	June 6, 2022
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

**OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

 

I, Fred Wilkinson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Columbia Laboratories, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterlyreport is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on ourevaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors: 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: November 14, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                 5
<MULTIPLIER>                           1

<S>                                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                        Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                            Sep-30-1998
<CASH>
           5
<SECURITIES>
      0
<RECEIVABLES>
  0
<ALLOWANCES>
 0
<INVENTORY>
    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                   5

<PP&E>
            0
<DEPRECIATION>
 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>
 5
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  61,960
<BONDS>
         0
<COMMON>
97,660
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>
    0
<OTHER-SE>
(159,615)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         5
<SALES>
           0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           4,985

<CGS>
            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   4,990
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  (5)
<INCOME-TAX>
  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        (5)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>
     0
<NET-INCOME>
 (5)
<EPS-BASIC>
  0
<EPS-DILUTED>
   0


</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of Kaire Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steve Westlund, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of the undersigneds knowledge and belief:
 
 (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.
 
 
 /s/ Steve Westlund
 Steve Westlund
 Chief Financial Officer
 May 21, 2004
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned
officers of Rent-Way, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the period ended September 30, 2003, (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                            | 
|--------------------------- | 
|Dated:    November 25, 2003 | 
|                            | 
|                            | 

|                            | 
|--------------------------- | 
|Dated:    November 25, 2003 | 
|                            | 
|                            | 

This certification is being furnished
solely to accompany this Form 10-K pursuant to 18 U.S.C.1350 and is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company unless such
incorporation is expressly referenced herein.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                          CREDENCE SYSTEMS CORPORATION
                          SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

The following are wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries of Credence
Systems Corporation:

     Credence Systems KK, a Japanese company;

     Credence Systems International, Inc., a Barbados corporation;

     Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc., an Oregon corporation;

     IMS Europe AG, a Swiss corporation (a wholly owned subsidiary of Integrated
     Measurement Systems, Inc.);

     IMS UK Ltd., a private limited company in the United Kingdom (a wholly
     owned subsidiary of Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.);

     IMS Japan KK, a Japanese company (a wholly owned subsidiary of Integrated
     Measurement Systems, Inc.);

     IMS (P), Inc., a Philippines corporation (an indirect subsidiary of
     Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.);

     IMS (M), SDN Bhd, a Malaysian corporation (a wholly owned subsidiary of
     Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.);

     IMS Deutschland GmbH, a German corporation (a wholly owned subsidiary of
     IMS Europe AG.);

     IMS France SARL, a French company (a wholly owned subsidiary of IMS Europe
     AG);

     Opmaxx, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Integrated Measurement
     Systems, Inc.);

     Credence International Limited, Inc., a Delaware corporation;

     Credence Systems Korea, a South Korea company (a wholly owned subsidiary of
     Credence International Limited, Inc.);

     Credence Systems Armenia L.L.C., an Armenian limited liability company;

<PAGE>

     Innotech-Credence Corporation, a Japanese company (a joint venture with
     Innotech Corporation, majority owned by the Company);

     Modulations Instruments, Inc., a Colorado corporation;

     NewMillennia Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation;

     NewMillennia Solutions LLC, a California limited liability company;

     Credence Europa Limited, a private limited company in the United Kingdom;

     Credence Systems (UK) Limited, a private limited company in the United
     Kingdom (a wholly owned subsidiary of Credence Europa Limited);

     Credence Systems Europe GmbH, a German corporation (a wholly owned
     subsidiary of Credence Europa Limited); and

     Dimensions Consulting, Inc., a California corporation.
657 S.E.2d 743

#### Luther ALEXANDER, Petitioner, v. FORKLIFTS UNLIMITED, Employer and Zurich American Insurance Company, Carrier, Respondents.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Feb. 6, 2008.

ORDER

We granted the petition for a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals’ decision in *Alexander v. Forklifts Unlimited,*365 S.C. 509, 618 S.E.2d 307 (Ct.App.2005). Pursuant to Rule 232, SCACR, the parties have submitted a settlement agreement to this Court. After careful consideration, we accept the proposed agreement. In addition, we hereby vacate the Court of Appeals’ published opinion in this matter.

JEAN H. TOAL, C.J., JAMES E. MOORE, JOHN H. WALLER, JR., and COSTA M. PLEICONES, JJ., and R. FERRELL COTHRAN, JR., A.J.
**Appendix 1**

**Fire and Aviation Preparedness Review Guide**

**Suggested Drill**

**Drill #02*Fire and Aviation Preparedness Review Guide***

**Handtool Safety Check**

April 2000

A-

Skill 2-1Revised 2008
#### BRUEN et al. v. HUFF et al.

Civ. No. 7169.

United States District Court W. D. Pennsylvania.

Aug. 20, 1948.

Brown, Critchlow, Flick & Peckham, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and Albert G. McCaleb, of Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs.

William J. Ruano, of Pittsburgh, Pa., Francis J. Klempay, of Youngstown Ohio, for defendants.

GIBSON, District Judge.

fl] The plaintiffs have objected to Interrogatories 3(a) and 3(b) propounded by defendants. The objection is based upon the demand that plaintiffs furnish copies of certain licenses mentioned in the interrogatories.

The objection must be sustained. The interrogatories are issued under authority of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 33, 28 U.S.C.A., which does not authorize the demand made. If the defendants are entitled to the copies demanded they must show “good cause therefor” and the court will thereupon order the plaintiffs “to produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing * * * of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects, or tangible things, not privileged, which constitute or contain evidence * * * ” as required by Rule 34.

On Motion to Join an Additional Party.

The defendants have moved the court to join Diebold, Inc. as a plaintiff in the action. While that corporation may not be a necessary party to the action, it does appear that it has a conditional exclusive license agreement under the patent in suit. In the interest of the possible reduction of actions based upon the patent, this court will make the order prayed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Correction to notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document contains a correction to a notice of open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee, which was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Thursday, April 30, 2009 (74 FR 20102). This notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee will be held.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janice Spinks at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6098.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Need for Correction

As published, the open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee, contains an error which may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification.

## Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication of the open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee, which was the subject of FR Doc. E9-9878, is corrected as follows:

                    On page 20102, column 2, under the caption                     **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                    , lines 8 through 11, the language “Thursday, June 25, 2009 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Friday, June 26, 2009 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Saturday, June 27, 2009 from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. Mountain” is corrected to read “Thursday, June 25, 2009 from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Friday, June 26, 2009 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturday, June 27, 2009 from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Mountain”.                

LaNita Van Dyke,

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedures and Administration). 

[FR Doc. E9-13233 Filed 6-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Document

Exhibit 10.3




May 21, 2022
Private & Confidential
Abhishek Jain
Dear Abhishek,
It is my pleasure to confirm your appointment as Interim Chief Financial Officer reporting to Reg Seeto, President & CEO.
This is a full-time exempt role at the Company with an annual salary of $305,000.00 paid on a semi-monthly basis on our regular paydays. Deductions required by law or authorized by you will be taken from each paycheck. Your target incentive compensation will increase to 35% of your base salary prorated for 2022, based on the effective date of this appointment, May 26, 2022.
Subject to the approval of the Board of Directors of the Company, you will be granted an option to purchase 10,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock. This option shall vest, subject to your continued employment with the Company, as to one fourth (1/4) of the shares on the one-year anniversary of your start date, and as to an additional one forty-eighth (1/48th) of the total number of shares subject to the option at the end of each calendar month thereafter. Details of the price of these options will be provided in your stock option grant and determined by the Board of Directors.
You are also eligible to receive equity in the organization in the form of RSUs. Subject to the approval of the Board of Directors of the Company, you will be granted restricted stock units of 15,000. 25% of the Restricted Stock Units will vest on the 1-Year anniversary of the Vesting Commencement Date and 25% of the Restricted Stock Units will vest each year thereafter on the same date as the Vesting Commencement date, subject to Participant continuing to be a Service Provider through each such date.
I am excited about this opportunity and I’m looking forward to an exciting year of growth and execution as we are “Building for the Future”!
Sincerely,
/s/ Reginald Seeto             
Reginald Seeto
CEO & President
/s/ Abhishek Jain       _                                       Date: May 21, 2022
Abhishek Jain
(Sign)


			
	LEGAL_US_W # 112905675.1