alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10-7.htm


Exhibit 10.7







July 5, 2013


 


VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL








John M. Devlin, Jr.









Re:  First Amendment to Agreement dated March 5, 2012







Dear John:


 


    The purpose of this agreement is to amend the compensation that you are to receive in consideration for your service to Augme Technologies, Inc. (the "Company"), and specifically to amend that certain agreement (the "Original Agreement") between you and the Company dated March 5, 2012.


 


    You agree to enter into this Amendment to the Original Agreement (the “First Amendment”), effective March 22, 2013, the date of Board approval.


 


    The following paragraph was included in your Original Agreement, which states:







you will receive one-percent (1%) Transaction Fee for your participation in the realization of the monetization of the Company’s intellectual property either through: a) a settlement agreement; b) license agreement (except for licenses entered into in the ordinary course of the Company’s business); or c) asset sale during the period of directorship and extending six months thereafter.







Shall be deleted in its entirety and nothing shall appear in its place.




 


    The Company affirms that all of the other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.


 


    Thank you for your attention to this matter.







Very truly yours,







AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


 


By:  /s/ Ivan Braiker                                                                


        Ivan Braiker, Chief Executive Officer







July 9, 2013


 


    I have read the agreement above.  By my signature below I confirm that I agree with the First Amendment to the Original Agreement and the modification of my compensation as a Director effected thereby.







/s/ John M. Devlin, Jr.                                                                           


John M. Devlin, Jr.
#### Brenda Andrews et al., Appellants, v New York City Housing Authority, Respondent.

Submitted April 30, 2012;

decided June 26, 2012

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.
CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     The  undersigned  hereby  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
undersigned's  best knowledge and belief,  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the Geodyne Energy Income  Limited  Partnership  II-B  ("Issuer") for the period
ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
      (b)   the  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

      Dated this 14th day of August, 2006.

                                    GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                    PARTNERSHIP II-B
                                    ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)


      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  furnished to Geodyne  Energy Income  Limited Partnership  II-B and will be
retained by Geodyne Energy Income Limited  Partnership II-B and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


                            MPHASE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


In connection with the Quarterly Report of mPhase Technologies, Inc., a New
Jersey corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10Q/A for the quarter ended
September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), I, Ronald A. Durando, Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section
1350), that to his 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.

/s/ Ronald A. Durando
---------------------
Ronald A. Durando
Chief Executive Officer


January 26, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Income Partners 1987-B, Ltd's balance sheet and statement of operations
contained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended Spetember 30, 1996
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         3,222
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  365,993
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               377,101
<PP&E>                                         24,727,166
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (20,237,798)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,866,469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          46,050
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     4,601,277
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4,866,469
<SALES>                                        1,396,958
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,423,382
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  877,276<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                346,617
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            346,617
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   346,617
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation deple-
tion and amoritization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and interest
expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION

I hereby certify that at a Board of Directors Meeting of the Bagdad Chase
Inc held at Blairs Restaurant, 718 South Grand Avenue, Los Angeles,
California on June 18, 1968 at 2:00 p.m., the following Resolution was
unanimously adopted.

RESOLVED: That the Officers of the Corporation he authorized to issue
790,040 shares of Bagdad Chase Inc stock to The Gold Ore Mining Company,
an Arizona corporation, or its nominee, in return f the appropriate
conveyance by said Company of all of its assets and thereafter take the
necessary steps to issue individual certificates to the stockholders of
said Company as designated by the Corporate Secretary of the Company
according to the shares of stock delivered by its Stockholders in
liquidation and satisfaction of their proportionate interest in any of
said Companys.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Corporation this 13th day of July, 1968.
Exhibit 22.1 List of Subsidiaries

The following  companies are subsidiaries of the Company and are included in the
consolidated financial statements of the Company:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>                                                  <C>                                    <C>

                                                                                            Percentage of Voting
NAME                                                  JURISDICTION OF ORGANIZATION          SECURITIES OWNED

American Locker Security Systems, Inc.                Delaware                              100%
American Locker Company, Inc.                         Delaware                              100%
American Locker Company of Canada, Ltd.               Dominion of Canada                    100% (1)
Canadian Locker Company, Ltd.                         Dominion of Canada                    100% (2)
American Locker Security Systems International        Virgin Islands                        100% (1)

(1)      Owned by American Locker Security Systems, Inc.
(2)      Owned by American Locker Company of Canada, Ltd.


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7135

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SCOTT WILLIAM THOMPSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Jerome B. Friedman, 

District Judge. (4:06-cr-00031-JBF-JEB-1; 4:10-cv-00131-JBF)

Submitted: November 15, 2011 Decided: November 18, 2011

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Scott William Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Matthew Hurt, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Scott William Thompson seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2011) 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) (2006). 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) 

(2006). 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 

Thompson 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 the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### In the Matter of Remus Smith, Appellant, v Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

Submitted May 7, 2012;

decided June 27, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Income  Partners  1987-B,  Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of operations con-
tained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended June 30, 1998 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         355,013
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  354,088
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               728,625
<PP&E>                                         24,157,610
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (21,084,676)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,802,242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,043
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,503,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,802,242
<SALES>                                        280,651
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               292,418
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  321,212<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (150,333)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (150,333)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (150,333)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 21.1
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
  State or CountryName
    
    of Organization1.
    
    Baker Global Project Services, Inc.
    
    Delaware2.
    
    Baker Holding Corporation
    
    Delaware3.
    
    Baker/OTS, Inc.
    
    Delaware4.
    
    Michael Baker International, Inc.
    
    Delaware5.
    
    Michael Baker Architects/Engineers, P.C.
    
    New Jersey6.
    
    Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
    
    New York7.
    
    Michael Baker Global, Inc.
    
    Pennsylvania8.
    
    Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
    
    Pennsylvania9.
    
    Baker/MO Services, Inc.
    
    Texas10.
    
    Vermont General Insurance Company
    
    Vermont11.
    
    Baker Energy International, Ltd.
    
    Cayman Islands12.
    
    Baker O&M International, Ltd.
    
    Cayman Islands13.
    
    Baker/OTS International, Inc.
    
    Cayman Islands14.
    
    Overseas Technical Services (Middle East) Ltd.
    
    Cayman Islands15.
    
    Michael Baker de Mexico S.A. de C.V.
    
    Mexico16.
    
    Baker/OTS Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom17.
    
    OTS International Training Services Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom18.
    
    Overseas Technical Services (Harrow) Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom19.
    
    SD Forty-Five Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom20.
    
    OTS Finance and Management Ltd.
    
    Vanuatu21.
    
    Overseas Technical Services International, Ltd.
    
    Vanuatu
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AFS'
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          44,958
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,742,641
<ALLOWANCES>                                   237,809
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          89,982
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,809,898
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      3,741,592
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           500
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,210,015
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,809,898
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,853,265
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  279,287
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               595,404
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               233,182
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             434,055
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                311,337
<INCOME-TAX>                                   115,221
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            196,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   196,116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
95-1774.

#### L.J. Minor Corp. v. Breitenbach.

Cuyahoga App. No. 67885. On motion for order to show cause. Motion denied.

F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         845,019
<SECURITIES>                                 1,722,927
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,283,743
<PP&E>                                       1,518,420
<DEPRECIATION>                               (580,203)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,893,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          360,515
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,516,972
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,893,127
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,584
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               184,072
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,529
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (197,167)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (197,167)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (197,167)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (7.63)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (7.63)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>EPS IS NET INCOME (LOSS) PER $1,000 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNIT.
</FN>


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JUAN MANUEL ROJAS-LUNA, AKA 

Manuel Juan Rojas, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 20-71891 

Agency No. A205-315-957 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2021**

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. 

Juan Manuel Rojas-Luna, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal 

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, 

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 

* 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

DEC 17 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 20-71891 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the legal question 

of whether a particular social group is cognizable, except to the extent that 

deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and 

regulations. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2020). We 

review factual findings for substantial evidence. Id. at 1241. We deny the petition 

for review.

The BIA did not err in concluding that Rojas-Luna did not establish 

membership in a cognizable particular social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 

1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular 

social group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of 

members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with 

particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting

Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))). Substantial evidence 

supports the determination that Rojas-Luna otherwise failed to establish that any 

harm he experienced or fears was or would be on account of a protected ground. 

See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire 

to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by 

gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Rojas-Luna’s asylum 

and withholding of removal claims fail.

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because 
3 20-71891 

Rojas-Luna failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or 

with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See 

Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject as unsupported by the record Rojas-Luna’s contentions that the 

BIA ignored evidence, violated his right to due process, or otherwise erred in its 

analysis of his claims.

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the 

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.