alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.73



 Exhibit 10.73 
 FOURTH AMENDMENT 
 TO THE 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 BETWEEN FOSTER WHEELER NORTH AMERICA CORP. 
 AND 

GARY T. NEDELKA 
 This FOURTH AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) to the Employment Agreement between FOSTER WHEELER NORTH AMERICA CORP., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and GARY T.
NEDELKA (the “Executive”), dated as of January 6, 2009 (the “Employment Agreement”), is made and entered into effective as of January 1, 2013 (the “Amendment Effective Date”). 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into a (i) First Amendment to the Employment Agreement, effective
December 21, 2009, (ii) Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement, dated August 30, 2010, and (iii) Third Amendment to the Employment Agreement, effective April 12, 2011 (the Employment Agreement, as so amended, the
“Agreement”); 
 WHEREAS, the Company desires to eliminate the gross-up it provides for taxable income on
certain perquisites under the Agreement; and 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9.7 of the Agreement, an amendment to
the Agreement may be made pursuant to the written consent of the Company and the Executive. 
 NOW THEREFORE, for good
and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree that the Agreement is amended as follows: 
 1. Agreement Section 3.6 is hereby revised to read in its entirety as follows: 
 “3.6 Perquisites. During the Term, the Executive shall be provided by the Company with the following perquisites: 

3.6.1 an annual physical examination; 
 3.6.2 an annual automobile allowance based upon the current Company policy; and 

3.6.3 home office equipment and associated services for business use in Executive’s homes not to exceed $5,000 per year.”

 As of the Amendment Effective Date, Executive shall not be eligible to receive a gross-up for taxable income on the
perquisites provided under this Section 3.6. For the avoidance of doubt, the elimination of the gross-up for taxable income in this Section 3.6 shall not affect the Executive’s gross-up on taxable income to the extent the Executive is
eligible for a gross-up under another section of the Agreement. 
 2. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in two
(2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which together will constitute one (1) and the same instrument. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Fourth Amendment to the
Agreement effective as of the date first written above. 
  

			
	FOSTER WHEELER NORTH AMERICA CORP.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Richard G. Lively

	Name:	 	Richard G. Lively
	Title:	 	Senior Vice President, Human Resources
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary T. Nedelka

		 	GARY T. NEDELKA



  
 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leonard Evans, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 469]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated October 7, 2002 (People *v Evans,*298 AD2d 401 [2002]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered January 30, 2001.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, PJ., Florio, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5051 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5051

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1001 Williams Street in Ignacio, Colorado, as the ``Leonard C. Burch 
                        Post Office Building''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5051

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1001 Williams Street in Ignacio, Colorado, as the ``Leonard C. Burch 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1001 
Williams Street in Ignacio, Colorado, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Leonard C. Burch Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Leonard C. Burch Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 6, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
344874.1 

Mayra V. Tarantino 

mtarantino@litedepalma.com

January 10, 2013 

VIA ECF 

Honorable Tonianne J. Bongiovanni, U.S.M.J. 

U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey 

Clarkson S. Fisher Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse 

402 East State Street 

Trenton, New Jersey 08608 

Re: AstraZeneca AB, et al. v. Hanmi USA, Inc., et al. 

Civil Action No. 11-760 (JAP)(TJB) 

Dear Judge Bongiovanni: 

We, along with Sughrue Mion, PLLC, represent the Hanmi Defendants in this 

matter. We were advised by email from AstraZeneca’s local counsel that Your Honor has 

invited Hanmi to participate in the telephone conference scheduled for January 23, 2013 in the 

AstraZeneca v. Mylan matter (Civil Action No. 12-1378). While Hanmi appreciates the 

invitation, Hanmi respectfully declines and requests that the Court schedule a call to discuss the 

scheduling issues in Hanmi’s January 8, 2013 letter to the Court and as contemplated by Your 

Honor during the November 28, 2012 teleconference. 

In view of the impending expiration of the 30 month stay, Hanmi respectfully requests 

the Court’s direction as soon as practical, and in advance of the call in the Mylan case, which 

stands in an entirely different posture. 

Respectfully, 

 s/Mayra V. Tarantino 

Mayra V. Tarantino 

MVT:emp 

cc: Counsel of Record (via ECF & email) 

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 266 Filed 01/10/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 9840
Exhibit 12.2

CFO SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Thelma G. Oribello, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F/A of PSi Technologies Holdings, Inc.;

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

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

4. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of
companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys
internal control over financial reporting.



By:

/S/ THELMA G. ORIBELLOName:

Thelma G. OribelloTitle:

Chief Financial OfficerJuly 24, 2006
1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-2965

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Raul Betancourt-Sanchez, also known * District of Nebraska. as Raul Sanchez, also known as Raul * Sanchez-Betancourt, also known as * [UNPUBLISHED] Jorge Betancourt-Nunez, also known as * Jorge Betancourt, * * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 6, 2000 Filed: April 12, 2000

___________ Before McMILLIAN, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Following a conditional guilty plea to a drug-conspiracy charge, Raul Betancourt-Sanche z challenges the district court’s 1 denial of his motion to suppress statements. He argues the officers lacked probable cause to arrest him without a warrant.-2-

We conclude probable cause existed to arrest Mr. Betancourt-Sanchez for illegal re-entry following deportation, giventhe totality of the circumstances: (1) the police were conducting a drug investigation of a “Raul Betancourt” and an officer had called an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agent, because the police believed the suspect being investigated had been deported previously after a drug conviction; (2) the INS agent uncovered “Raul Sanchez-Betancourt’s” record of an arrest for drug trafficking, alien registration number, and drug-trafficker deportation information; (3) the INS agent requested this person’s detention; and (4) when confronted with a police photo of the person known to police as “Raul Betancourt,” Mr. Betancourt-Sanchez admittedto the arresting officer that he was “Raul,” the person in the photo. See Kuehl v. Burtis , 173 F.3d 646, 648 (8th Cir. 1999) (probable cause to arrest is assessed under totality of circumstances); UnitedStates v. Morgan , 997 F.2d 433, 436 (8th Cir.1993) (probable cause to arrest may be based on officers’ collective knowledge); United States v. Travis , 993 F.2d 1316, 1323 (8th Cir.) (officers may make warrantless arrests when they have probable cause to believe suspect has committed felony, and probable cause exists when officers possess information warranting prudent person in believing suspect had committed or was committing offense), cert. denied , 510 U.S. 883 and 510 U.S. 889 (1993); UnitedStates v. Morales , 923 F.2d 621, 624 (8th Cir. 1991) (while bare suspicion of criminal activity is insufficient to establish probable cause, police neednot have enough evidence to justify conviction before making warrantless arrest). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Case 2:11-cr-00164-KSH Document 12 Filed 04/19/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 30
Case 2:11-cr-00164-KSH Document 12 Filed 04/19/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 31
### The Honorable D. Brook Bartlett, Chief Judge, United States 1 

### District Court for the Western District of Missouri. ___________ No. 95-3264

___________ Dorothy Lewis, * * Appeal from the United States Appellant, * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. v. * * [UNPUBLISHED] Fred Gibbs, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: March 26, 1996 Filed: April 10, 1996

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Dorothy Lewis appeals the district court's dismissal with prejudice 1 of her action against Fred Gibbs. We deny Lewis's motion to strike Gibbs' s app ellate brief. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties ' briefs, we conclude the judgment of the district court was correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

### -2- A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

|CERTIFICATION OF                             
|---------------------------------------------
|CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER                      
|AND                                          
|CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER                      
|PURSUANT TO                                  
|18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                      
|AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                       
|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Chris Cooper, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of Explortex Energy Inc., (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, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for
      the six months ended October 31, 2007 (the Quarterly Report) fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                    

| | By:    |                            
| | ------ | ---------------------------
| |        | /S/
      Chris Cooper     
| | Name:  | Chris Cooper               
| |        |                            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and
| |        | Chief Financial Officer    
| |        |                            
| | Date:  | December 13, 2007          

---
| 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. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| March 31, 2010 |   | /s/ Christopher J. Schaber            |
|----------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|           |   | Christopher J. Schaber, Ph.D.         |
|           |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|           |   | (Principal Executive Officer)         |
|           |   |                                  |
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, the undersigned, Jay C. Peterson, Chief Financial Officer, of Forgent Networks, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:



| | 1. | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended October 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)), 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/ JAY C. PETERSONJay C. PetersonChief Financial OfficerDecember 15, 2004
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

DONNA LLOYD,

Plaintiff,

v.

AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Defendant.

:

:

: Civil Action No. 11-4071 (JAP)

:

:

:

: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

:

:

:

This matter having been opened by the Court sua sponte based on Plaintiff’s failure to 

prosecute her case; and the Court having conducted a status telephone conference in this matter 

earlier today; and the Court noting that the purpose of today’s conference was to discuss 

Plaintiff’s counsel’s inability to contact his client; and Plaintiff’s counsel further indicating at the 

conference that Plaintiff’s telephone number and e-mail address have changed; and the Court 

noting that it has been approximately six weeks since counsel has had contact with Plaintiff; and 

for good cause shown;

IT IS on this 4

th day of June, 2013, 

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall appear IN PERSON before the Honorable Tonianne J. 

Bongiovanni, U.S.M.J., Room 6052, 402 East State Street, Trenton, New Jersey 08608, on July 

18, 2013 at 2:00 P.M., to show cause why Plaintiff’s case should not be dismissed and 

Defendant awarded judgment by default on its counterclaims and to additionally show cause why 

sanctions, such as attorneys’ fees should not be imposed; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall contact her attorney no later than July 9, 2013; and it is 

further

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel shall submit a written update regarding Plaintiff’s 

Case 3:11-cv-04071-MAS-TJB Document 47 Filed 06/04/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 199
status no later than July 13, 2013; and it is further

ORDERED that should Plaintiff fail to appear at the aforementioned Order to Show 

Cause scheduled to take place on July 18, 2013 at 2:00 P.M., then the Court may recommend 

dismissal of Plaintiff’s case without further notice; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel is to send a copy of this Order by certified mail to 

Plaintiff’s last known address and to contact Plaintiff by any additional means counsel deems 

appropriate. 

 s/ Tonianne J. Bongiovanni 

HONORABLE TONIANNE J. BONGIOVANNI

UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:11-cv-04071-MAS-TJB Document 47 Filed 06/04/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 200
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Scott Mazzara, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 203]

In 2002, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of reckless endangerment in the first degree and was sentenced to 90 days in jail and five years of probation. He subsequently admitted to violating the condition of his probation which required him to report to his probation officer. As a result, County Court revoked defendant’s probation and resentenced him to lVa to 4 years in prison. Defendant now appeals, contending that his resentence is harsh and excessive. We disagree and affirm. Notwithstanding the recommendation by the People and the Probation Department of a one-year period of incarceration, our review of the record reveals neither an abuse of discretion by County Court nor the existence of any extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the resentence *(see People v Osborne,*38 AD3d 1132, 1132-1133 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 849 [2007]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5100 

To reinstate for 10 years the repealed criminal provisions relating to assault 

weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2004 

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York (for herself, Mr. HOEFFEL, Mr. FERGUSON, 

and Mr. CASTLE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To reinstate for 10 years the repealed criminal provisions 

relating to assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Neighborhood Security 

5 Act’’. 
2 

•HR 5100 IH 

1 SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT FOR 10 YEARS OF REPEALED 

2 CRIMINAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO AS3 SAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE CAPACITY AM4 MUNITION FEEDING DEVICES. 

5 (a) REINSTATEMENT OF PROVISIONS WHOLLY RE6 PEALED.—Paragraphs (30) and (31) of section 921(a), 

7 subsections (v) and (w) and Appendix A of section 922, 

8 and the last 2 sentences of section 923(i) of title 18, 

9 United States Code, as in effect just before the repeal 

10 made by section 110105(2) of the Violent Crime Control 

11 and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, are hereby enacted 

12 into law. 

13 (b) REINSTATEMENT OF PROVISIONS PARTIALLY RE14 PEALED.—Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is 

15 amended— 

16 (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking subpara17 graph (B) and inserting the following: 

18 ‘‘(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), 

19 (k), (r), (v), or (w) of section 922;’’; and 

20 (2) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking clause 

21 (i) and inserting the following: 

22 ‘‘(i) is a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled 

23 shotgun, or semiautomatic assault weapon, the per24 son shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 

25 not less than 10 years; or’’. 
3 

•HR 5100 IH 

1 (c) SUNSET.—Effective 10 years after the date of the 

2 enactment of this section— 

3 (1) the provisions enacted by subsection (a) of 

4 this section are repealed; and 

5 (2) section 924 of title 18, United States Code, 

6 is amended— 

7 (A) in subsection (a)(1)(B), by striking 

8 ‘‘(r), (v), or (w)’’ and inserting ‘‘or (r)’’; and 

9 (B) in subsection (c)(1)(B)(i), by striking 

10 ‘‘short-barreled shotgun, or semiautomatic as11 sault weapon’’ and inserting ‘‘or short-barreled 

12 shotgun’’. 

Æ
Case 3:10-cr-00571-PGS Document 24 Filed 01/06/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 52
Case 3:10-cr-00571-PGS Document 24 Filed 01/06/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 53
Case 3:10-cr-00571-PGS Document 24 Filed 01/06/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 54