alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-4.14



 Exhibit 4.14 
 Non-Binding English Translation 
 of Hebrew Original 

Discount 

The Business Division 
 23 Yehuda Halevy Street Tel Aviv 65137, Tel: 03-5146565 Fax: 03-5605907 
  

			
	To:	  	Date: August 11, 2011

 Orbotech Ltd. 
 Re: Financing Agreement dated as of December 21, 2009, as amended on May 27, 2010, and again on February 15, 2011 (“hereinafter the Financing Agreement”) 

At your request, we hereby confirm our agreement that in Section 2.1 of the Financing Agreement, the amount of $160 million will be written instead
of the amount of $185 million and accordingly the above referenced amendments dated May 27, 2010 and February 15, 2011 are hereby cancelled. 
 As a result of the above the existing financing in your account no. 010-021109, will remain unchanged, and you will not be able to utilize amounts in excess of the amount mentioned in Section 2.1, as
amended above, pursuant to the Financing Agreement, and therefore, effective as of July 1, 2011, you will no longer be charged a non-utilization fee with respect to the remaining balance of $25 million, which has been cancelled as provided
above. 
 Other than the reduction of the credit amount under the Financing Agreement as provided herein—the Financing Agreement and the
loan documents, including the securities for guaranteeing the loans will remain in full effect and scope with no change. 
  

	
	 /s/ and stamp

	 Israel Discount Bank Ltd.

Business Division


 To: Israel Discount Bank Ltd. 
 We hereby confirm our agreement to your above letter and hereby undertake to you to act accordingly. 
 Date: 
  

	
	
/s/            

	Orbotech Ltd.
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 TETRAGENEX PHARMACEUTICALS, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10QSB/A-2 for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the " Report"), I,
Martin F. Schacker, CEO, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                        TETRAGENEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.





                                        BY: /s/ Martin F. Schacker
                                            -------------------------------
                                            MARTIN F. SCHACKER
                                            CEO

                                                   May 11, 2007
                                                   ------


<PAGE>

                            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 TETRAGENEX PHARMACEUTICALS, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10QSB/A-2 for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the " Report"), I,
Neil Martucci, CFO, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant
to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                        TETRAGENEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.





                                        BY: /s/ Neil Martucci
                                            -------------------------------
                                            NEIL MARTUCCI
                                            CFO

                                                   May 11, 2007
                                                   ------
#### George L. Pratt v. The First National Bank of Arkansas City, Kansas.

No. 369.*

Practice, Courts of *Appeals—Necessary Parties.*Where a joint judgment was rendered against the maker and the guarantor of a promissory note, the maker of the note is a necessary party to proceedings in error for a review of such judgment.

Error from Cowley district court; A. M. Jackson, judge.

Opinion filed July 13, 1898.

Dismissed.

*Wall & Brooks,*for plaintiff in error.'

*Pollock & Lafferty,*for defendant in error.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Milton, J. :

George L. Pratt seeks the reversal of a judgment rendered against himself and D. J. Buckley, jointly, in favor of the First National Bank of Arkansas City, Kansas, upon a promissory note for $1000, exe*2cuted by Buckley to the bank as payee, and indorsed in blank by Pratt, who thereby became a guarantor. Buckley has not been made a party to the proceedings in error, although he filed an answer and appeared at the trial in the district court. The failure so to join him is made the principal ground of the motion to dismiss filed by the defendant in error. The motion must be sustained. In the case *of Manufacturing Co. v. Richardson, 57*Kan. 661, 47 Pac. 537, the court said:

> “The rule is well settled, and has often been enforced by this court, that all persons against whom a joint judgment has been rendered must be made parties to a proceeding to reverse such judgment, and that a failure to join any of them either as plaintiffs or defendants is ground for the dismissal of the case.”

Among the cases cited as supporting that, decision is *Bonebrake v. Ætna Life Ins. Co.,*3 Kan. App. 708, 41 Pac. 67, in which the syllabus reads :

> “A joint judgment rendered against the principal and sureties on a bond cannot be reviewed or disturbed by proceedings in error when the principal to such judgment is not made a party in the appellate court, and no valid reason appears for such omission.”

The petition in error is dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2





SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 2) of MedPro Safety Products, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Marc T. Ray, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, in accordance with 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), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




|    |                                                                                                                                                     
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:January 12, 2012By:/s/ Marc T. RayMarc T. RayChief Financial Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED FEBRUARY 13, 2015

NO. 03-14-00686-CR

Ex parte Tammy Marie Ybarra

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF CALDWELL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED AS MOOT -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on September 26, 2014. Having 

reviewed the record, the Court concludes that the appeal should be dismissed. Therefore, the 

Court dismisses the appeal as moot. Because appellant is indigent for purposes of this 

proceeding, no adjudication of costs is made.
| (1)   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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. |

| Date:  September 17, 2011 |   | By: /s/ Ron Hanna                                                    |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                |   | Ron Hanna, President                                                 |   |
|                                |   | (Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial  Officer) |   |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

FILED

DA 20-0487

IN RE THE ADOPTION OF:

OCT 2 0 2020

Bowen Greenwood

Cleric of Supreme Courl

State nr

J.H., ORDER

A Minor Child.

The Appellate Defender Division (ADD), on behalf of Appellant Father K.P.H., has

petitioned for leave to file an out-of-time appeal on Father's behalf in the above-titled

matter, pursuant to M. R. App. P. 4(6). ADD states that Father was involved in a private

adoption action seeking termination of his parental rights. An evidentiary hearing was held

on August 19, 2020. On August 25, 2020, a document entitled, "Petitioner's Proposed

Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order" was filed. In its heading, this document

contained the name and contact information for petitioner's attorney who prepared and

submitted the document to the court for consideration. Oddly, this proposed document was

signed and dated by District Court Judge Marks. On September 16, 2020 the District Court

issued a Decree of Adoption—containing Judge Marks' name and contact information in

the heading. In the Decree of Adoption, the prior "proposed findings" were referenced as

an actual court order, not merely a proposed document, terminating Father's parental rights.

Upon receipt of the Decree of Adoption, Father's trial counsel contacted ADD to

attempt to preserve Father's right to appeal. ADD advises Petitioner's counsel was

contacted but did not respond as to Petitioner's position on the out-of-time appeal request.

We grant out-of-time appeals under M. R. App. P. 4(6) in the "infrequent harsh case

and under extraordinary circumstances amounting to a gross miscarriage ofjustice." ADD

argues that such would occur here if Father were denied his right to appeal when it was

unclear the district court had issued a termination order entitled "Proposed Findings . . ."

We agree.

10/20/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0487
Under the facts of this case, the untimeliness of K.P.H.'s appeal is through no fault

of his own. Further, there was confusion on the part of Father's trial counsel in that counsel

thought the document entitled "Petitioner's Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law

and Order" was merely a document proposed by petitioner, not an actual order terminating

Father's parental rights. Given the importance of the interests at stake for Father,

IT IS ORDERED that the petition for leave to file an out-of-time appeal is

GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ADD shall promptly order the necessary

transcripts for the appeal.

The Clerk of this Court is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of

record.

1"1-,

DATED this day of October, 2020.

Chief Justice

d(.,,.. ihd

Slia.-4sJustices
#### Brunilda Tirado, Plaintiff, v Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc., et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.) Safeway Environmental Corp., Second Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, v John Catsimatidis et al., Second Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.

[853 NYS2d 879]

*476No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 812 

Making a technical correction to the SFC Sean Cooley and SPC Christopher 

Horton Congressional Gold Star Family Fellowship Program Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 27, 2020 

Ms. LOFGREN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Making a technical correction to the SFC Sean Cooley and 

SPC Christopher Horton Congressional Gold Star Family Fellowship Program Act. 

1 Resolved, That section 2(d) of House Resolution 107 

2 (agreed to October 29, 2019) is amended by striking ‘‘or 

3 sibling of’’ and inserting ‘‘parent, or sibling of’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
ex10_38.htm








EXHIBIT 10.38


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT







This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into this 20th day of November 2012, by and among PINNACLE BANK, a Tennessee state-chartered bank (the “Bank”), PINNACLE FINANCIAL PARTNERS, INC., a Tennessee corporation (the “Company”) (collectively, the Bank and the Company are referred to hereinafter as the “Employer”) and MICHAEL TERRY TURNER (the “Executive”).







WHEREAS, the Bank, the Company and the Executive are parties to that certain employment agreement dated January 1, 2008 (the “Employment Agreement”), pursuant to which the Executive serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank and the Company; and







WHEREAS, each of Pinnacle National Bank (the predecessor of the Bank), the Company and the Executive desires to amend the Employment Agreement.







NOW THEREFORE, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:







1.             Capitalized Terms.  Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Employment Agreement.







2.             Amendment to Employment Agreement. The Employment Agreement is hereby amended as follows:







(a)           Each reference to the “Human Resources Committee” throughout the Employment Agreement is hereby revised to read the “Human Resources and Compensation Committee”.







(b)           Section 4.7 of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:







4.7 VACATION.  On a non-cumulative basis, the Executive shall be entitled to five (5) weeks of vacation in each successive twelve-month period during the Term, during which his compensation shall be paid in full.







(c)           Section 8(ii) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:







(ii) If to the Executive, to him at:







The most recent mailing address of the Executive that Employer has on record.







3.             Except as expressly modified hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


 


4.             This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.







[remainder of page intentionally left blank]


 




  





  











  






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to be executed as of the date first above written.








	  	
PINNACLE FINANCIAL PARTNERS, INC.


	  	  	  	  
	  	
By:

	/s/ Hugh M. Queener	  
	  	
Name:

	Hugh M. Queener	  
	  	
Title:

	CAO	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	
PINNACLE BANK

	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	
By:

	/s/ Hugh M. Queener	  
	  	
Name:

	Hugh M. Queener	  
	  	
Title:

	CAO	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	
EXECUTIVE

	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	/s/ M. Terry Turner	  
	  	
MICHAEL TERRY TURNER
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**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 ZipGlobal Holdings, Inc. (the
“Registrant”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Michael C. Lee, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
      of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
      knowledge:




(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2)
      the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.




Date:
                August 6, 2007
            /s/
                MICHAEL C. LEEMichael
                C. LeePresident
                and Chief ExecutiveOfficer
              ZipGlobal Holdings, Inc.(Principal
              Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
              Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rickey Harinarin, Appellant.

[826 NYS2d 185]

*456Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J), rendered March 26, 2003, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of three years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that his attorney’s concern about his fee created a conflict vitiating defendant’s plea is not reviewable on direct appeal because it turns on matters outside the record, particularly as to the substance of counsel’s advice before defendant agreed to the plea, and counsel’s reason for giving such advice *(see People v Denny,*95 NY2d 921 [2000]). On the existing record, to the extent it permits review, we find that defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards *(see People v Ford,*86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; *see also Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]), and that he was not deprived of his right to conflict-free representation *(see Cuyler v Sullivan,*446 US 335, 348-350 [1980]; *People v Harris,*99 NY2d 202, 210-211 [2002]). Shortly before the plea, the attorney advised the court that defendant was unable to pay him enough for him to continue the representation. However, counsel made no application to be relieved. Counsel obtained a favorable plea, and defendant stated in his allocution that he had not been coerced into taking it. There is no evidence that counsel’s advice concerning the plea was a result of his economic interest *(see People v Husbands,*303 AD2d 227 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 562 [2003]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

______________________________

:

JOHN WALLER and WANDA : Civil Action

KELLY-WALLER, : No. 1:10-cv-06342 (NLH)

Plaintiffs, :

v. :

: ORDER

FOULKE MANAGEMENT CORPORATION :

 d/b/a CHERRY HILL DODGE AND: 

 CHERRY HILL TRIPLEX; :

 CHRYLSER FINANCIAL, :

Defendants. :

______________________________:

APPEARANCES:

Graham F. Baird, Esquire

Weisberg Law, P.C.

7 South Morton Ave.

Morton, PA 19070

Attorney for Plaintiffs John Waller and Wanda Kelly-Waller

Laura D. Ruccolo, Esquire

Capehart & Scatchard, PA

800 Midlantic Drive

Suite 300 S

Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054

Attorney for Defendant Foulke Management Corporation d/b/a Cherry

Hill Dodge and Cherry Hill Triplex

HILLMAN, District Judge

For the reasons explained in this Court’s Opinion

entered today, it is this 16th day of March, 2012, 

ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration

[15] is DENIED.

 s/Noel L. Hillman 

NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

At Camden, New Jersey

Case 1:10-cv-06342-NLH -AMD Document 31 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 208
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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Vitamin Shoppe, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 27, 2010 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael G. Archbold, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of VS Holdings, Inc.
|---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: April 30, 2010



/s/ Michael G. ArchboldMichael G. ArchboldChief Financial and Chief Operating Officer(Principal Financial Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this Report.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Patient Safety Technologies,
Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Steven
H. Kane, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Marc L. Rose, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ Steven H. KaneName:
      Steven H. KaneTitle:
      Chief Executive OfficerDate:
      March 31, 2010/s/ Marc L. RoseName:
      Marc L. RoseTitle:
      Chief Financial OfficerDate:
      March 31, 2010





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and
is not being “filed” as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure
document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise subject to liability under that
section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference
into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange
Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically
incorporated by reference in any such filing.





A
signed original 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.