alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Crim. No. 11-352-03(FSH) 

V. 

JAISON MARTINEZ REPORT & RECOMMENDATION 

This matter having come before the Court by way of referral from the Hon. Faith S. 

Hochberg to conduct a proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and to issue a report and 

recommendation regarding the defendant's entry of a guilty plea; and the Court having 

considered the written consent by the defendant and defense counsel to have the proceeding 

before the Undersigned; and the Undersigned having conducted a proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. 

Crim. P. 11; and as more fully set forth and reflected in the transcript of proceedings dated 

January 18, 2012, the Court makes the following report: 

1. The defendant consented to the entry of a guilty plea before a United States Magistrate 

Judge, subject to the defendant's ability to file any written objections to the findings and 

recommendations contained in this report and orally stated at the Rule 11 proceeding and subject 

to its adoption by the United States District Judge; 

2. The defendant fully understood the oath and consequences of failing to tell the truth at 

- the plea hearing; 

3. The defendant fully understood the nature of the charges and the consequences of the 

guilty plea, including the maximum penalties that the defendant faces; 

4. The defendant fully understood that while the United States Sentencing Guidelines 

are not binding, they will be considered; 

5. The defendant fully understood the right to plead "not guilty" and to be tried by a jury, 

-

Case 2:11-cr-00352-MCA Document 65 Filed 01/18/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 179
with the assistance of counsel, and that the defendant would have the right to confront and crossexamine witnesses, call witnesses and compel the production of evidence if the defendant so 

chose, and to remain silent or testify, if the defendant so chose; 

6. The defendant fully understood that if the guilty plea is accepted, then there would be 

no trial in this case; 

7. The defendant was fully competent and capable of entering an informed guilty plea; 

8. The defendant's waiver of the right to file an appeal and to file a post-conviction 

challenge, and the plea were free, knowing, and voluntary; and 

9. There is a factual basis to support the plea of guilty. 

Based upon the foregoing, and based upon the transcript of the proceedings, it is on this 

l81

h day of January, 2012, recommended to the United States District Judge that the defendant's 

plea of guilty be accepted and that a judgment of guilt to the Indictment be entered . .... 

Respectfully, 

s/Patty Shwartz 

United States Magistrate Judge 

NOTICE 

FAILURE TO FILE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE FOREGOING REPORT, WITHIN 

FOURTEEN DAYS OF RECEIPT OF SAME, MAY BAR DE NOVO DETERMINATION 

BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE OF AN ISSUE COVERED HEREIN AND 

SHALL BAR APPELLATE REVIEW OF SUCH FACTUAL FINDINGS AS MAY BE 

ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. 

-

Case 2:11-cr-00352-MCA Document 65 Filed 01/18/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 180
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

 
 




 
 TP COMMON STOCK INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS CUSIP 88165N 10 5 THIS CERTIFIES THAT IS THE RECORD HOLDER OF BY FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.001 PER SHARE, OF AMERICAN Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc.COUNTERSIGNED
transferable on the books of the Corporation in person or by duly authorized Attorney, upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. STOCK AND This WITNESS Certificate the facsimile is not valid signatures until countersigned of the
Corporation’s by the Transfer duly authorized Agent and officers. registered by the Registrar. New(Brooklyn, TRANSFER Dated: TRANSFER TRUST& REGISTERED: York) AGENT AUTHORIZED AND COMPANY, LLC PRESIDENT TREASURER AND SECRETARY SIGNATURE
REGISTRAR 







 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate,
shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

											
	TEN COM	  	 – as tenants in common
 – as tenants by the entireties
 – as joint tenants with right

   of survivorship and not as

   tenants in common
	  		 	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT–	 	                     Custodian   
                  
	TEN ENT	  	  		 		 	(Cust)     	  	    (Minor)    
	JT TEN	  	  		 		 	  
   under Uniform Gifts to
Minors

		  	  		 		 		  	
		  	  		 		 	  Act                        
         
		  	  		 		 	(State)                

 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

    For value received,
                                         
                                         
                               hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 

 

			
	 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
	  	
	    	  	 

  
  

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE 

 
  
  

 

                         
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                         
              Shares 
 of the common stock represented by the within
Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably 

constitute and appoint                   
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                        

 
  
 Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 
 Dated,                      

 

							
		 		 		 	  

		 		 	NOTICE:	 	THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE
WHATEVER.

 SIGNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: 
  

					
	  
	 		 	
	THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED
SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ivanhoe Energy 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 report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a  15(f) and 15d  15(f)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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.)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;c.)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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; andd.)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors:
 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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; andb.)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
   By:
    
    /s/ W. Gordon LancasterW. Gordon Lancaster
Chief Financial Officer
 96
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

OFFICE: TRENTON DATE: June 3, 2015

JUDGE MARY L. COOPER 

COURT REPORTERS: Regina Tell and Carol Farrell

TITLE OF CASE: CV11-3962(MLC) 

HELSINN HEALTHCARE S.A. 

v.

DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES, LTD. 

 

APPEARANCES:

Joseph O’Malley, Esq., Eric Dittman, Esq., Isaac Ashkenazi, Esq., 

and Charles Lizza, Esq., for plaintiffs

Gorge Lombardi, Esq., Jovial Wong, Esq., Mayra Tarantino, Esq., Julia Johnson, Esq.,

and Brendan Barker, Esq. for defendant TEVA

Stuart Sender, Esq., Michael Imbacuan, Esq., Howard Wang, Esq., Kenneth Crowell, Esq.

and Constance Huttner, Esq., for defendant DR. REDDY'S LAB

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:

Trial without jury continued before the Honorable Mary L. Cooper.

Georgio Calderari continued on direct for defendants.

Ordered trial adjourned until 6/4/15 at 9:30am.

Lunch recess: 11:00am – 1:00pm

TIME COMMENCED: 9:30am 

TIME ADJOURNED: 4:00pm 

TOTAL TIME: 4 hours, 30 minutes

s/Elizabeth Heffner

Deputy Clerk

Case 3:11-cv-03962-MLC-DEA Document 321 Filed 06/03/15 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 18385
EXHIBIT 10.49

2005 EXECUTIVE BONUS SUMMARY

On March 10, 2006, the Board of Directors of Centillium Communications, Inc. (the "Registrant") approved bonuses for the
executive officers of Centillium. The bonuses were based on the achievement of certain revenue, earnings and key corporate initiatives.
These bonuses are subject to the completion of the 2005 audit of the Registrant's financials by the Registrant's independent auditors.
The bonuses are as follows:

|Faraj AalaeiChief Executive Officer                     |  | $336,222.00                       
|------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------
|Scott KamslerChief Financial Officer                    |  | $114,316.00                       
|Wayne GartinVice President, Sales                       |  | $135,354.00                       
|Jitesh VadhiaSenior Vice President &
   General Manager |  | $ 84,262.00  (new hire April 2005)

---
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 Ben Franklin Financial, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Glen A. Miller, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (2) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (3) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 13, 2006



|                                          
|------------------------------------------
|/s/ Glen A. Miller                        
|Glen A. Miller                            
|Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### Robert W. MILNER, Jr., Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL AIRLINES, Inc., et al., Defendants. Bert F. WINSTON, Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL AIRLINES, Inc., Defendant.

Civ. A. Nos. 11689, 12274.

United States District Court S. D. Texas, Houston Division.

Nov. 24, 1958.

Bracewell, Reynolds *&*Patterson (Joe H. Reynolds), Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs Robert W. Milner, Jr., and Bert F. Winston.

Baker, Botts, Andrews & Shepherd (Denman Moody), Houston, Tex., for defendant National Airlines, Inc.

INGRAHAM, District Judge.

The plaintiff Bert F. Winston filed his motion for production of documents pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Similar motions urged by Milner have been denied. Winston’s motion will likewise be denied.

The defendants in each case have filed a motion to consolidate the two causes for trial under the provisions of Rule 42 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, alleging that both causes involve common questions of law and fact, in that each of said causes allegedly grew out of certain incidents occurring aboard defendant’s flight No. 363 between New Orleans, Louisiana, and Houston, Texas, on defendant’s air line on the 19th day of November, 1957. The plaintiffs oppose the motion to consolidate.

From reading the complaint filed by Milner it appears that the facts complained of by him are alleged to have occurred on the flight in question and on the date in question. Milner alleges that Winston was his traveling companion. He complains of acts committed aboard the aircraft of National Airlines, Inc. by National employees Delk and Donner. The space aboard such aircraft is confined to a limited area and the time involved in flight from New Orleans, Louisiana, to Houston, Texas, is limited.

From reading the complaint filed by Winston it appears that the facts complained of by him are alleged to have occurred on the flight in question and on the date in question. Winston alleges that Milner was his traveling companion. He complains of acts committed aboard the aircraft of National Airlines, Inc. by National employees Delk and Donner. The space aboard such aircraft is confined to a limited area and the time involved in flight from New Orleans, Louisiana to Houston, Texas, is limited.

*8It is my opinion that this is. the sort of situation contemplated by Rule 42(a). The acts alleged by plaintiff in each case are confined to the same limited area and the same limited time and in the presence ,of the same limited number of witnesses, including Milner, Winston, Delk and Donner. The court should not be required to conduct two trials in order to ascertain what happened within that limited space and time.

The motion of defendants to consolidate the two causes for trial will be granted.

The clerk will notify counsel to draft and submit orders accordingly. The order consolidating the causes will contain an order transferring the consolidated causes to the docket of Judge Con-nally.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5286

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, polymer 

with N,N’-bis(2-aminoethyl)- 1,2-ethanediamine, cyclized, methyl sulfates. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 7, 2004

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic 

acid, polymer with N,N’-bis(2-aminoethyl)- 1,2-

ethanediamine, cyclized, methyl sulfates.

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON 1,4-

4 BENZENEDICARBOXYLIC ACID, POLYMER 

5 WITH N,N’-BIS(2-AMINOETHYL)- 1,2-

6 ETHANEDIAMINE, CYCLIZED, METHYL SUL7 FATES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

9 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 
2

•HR 5286 IH 

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.07 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic 

acid, polymer with N,N’-

bis(2-aminoethyl)- 1,2-

ethanediamine, cyclized, 

methyl sulfates (CAS No. 

68187–22–4) (provided for 

in subheading 3908.90.70) .. Free No Change No Change On or before 

12/31/2007 ’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

5 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

6 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
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 Q Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven J. Borst, 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 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 results of operations of the Company.



|Date: August 9, 2012 | By:    | /s/ STEVEN J. BORST                    
|-------------------- | ------ | ---------------------------------------
|                     | Name:  | Steven J. Borst                        
|                     | Title: | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
|                     |        | (Principal Financial Officer           
|                     |        | and Principal Accounting Officer)
##### 



EXHIBIT
10.1
 THE SECURITY REPRESENTED HEREBY HAS NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS
AMENDED (THE ACT). THIS SECURITY CANNOT BE SOLD OR OTHERWISE TRANSFERRED UNLESS THIS SECURITY IS
REGISTERED UNDER THE ACT OR THE COMPANY IS FURNISHED WITH AN ACCEPTABLE OPINION OF COUNSEL THAT AN
EXEMPTION FROM REGISTRATION IS AVAILABLE.
 THIS NOTE AND THE INDEBTEDNESS EVIDENCED HEREBY ARE SUBORDINATE IN THE MANNER AND TO THE EXTENT SET
FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN AMENDED AND RESTATED SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (THE SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT)
DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2007 AMONG, BORROWER, U.S. VOICE & DATA, LLC, THE SUBORDINATED CREDITOR
(AS SUCH TERM IS DEFINED THEREIN) PARTY THERETO AND HILCO FINANCIAL LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY, TO THE SENIOR INDEBTEDNESS (AS SUCH TERM IS DEFINED IN THE SUBORDINATION
AGREEMENT); AND EACH HOLDER OF THIS NOTE, BY ITS ACCEPTANCE HEREOF, SHALL BE BOUND BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT.
 SUBORDINATED PROMISSORY NOTE
 U.S. $1,000,000.00
    
    August 30, 2007
Substituted and Amended September 26, 2007
Tampa, FL
 FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
 Interest
 Default
 Prepayment




---



##### 



Successors and Assigns
 Waivers
 Controlling Law
  Modifications; Waivers
 WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL .
 2




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 Brookside Technology Holdings Corp.By:Name:Title:
 3
July 23, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NEFTALI ARROYO, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00226-CV V.

CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC, Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on February 26, 2013. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellant, Neftali Arroyo.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
S05Y0741.

#### IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM H. NORTON.

(625 SE2d 753)

Decided January 17, 2006.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Gene Chapman, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

Per curiam.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Request for Reinstatement filed by William H. Norton in which he seeks reinstatement to the practice of law following an indefinite suspension in one matter and a subsequent 120-day suspension in a second matter. Norton was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in *In the Matter of Norton,*277 Ga. 523 (591 SE2d 833) (2004), subject to reinstatement upon his return of documents and his return of the unused portion of a retainer paid by a former client. In a separate matter, Norton was suspended for 120 days with said suspension to begin as soon as Norton met the requirements for reinstatement set forth regarding the indefinite suspension. See *In the Matter of Norton,*279 Ga. 31 (608 SE2d 614) (2005). In his Request for Reinstatement and affidavit of compliance, Norton states that as of July 8, 2005, he satisfied the requirements for lifting the indefinite suspension and that more than 120 days have passed since Norton’s compliance with those requirements. The State Bar, in a letter sent to this Court, states that it has no objection to Norton’s request for reinstatement.

We have reviewed the record in this matter and agree with the State Bar that as Norton has satisfied the requirements for lifting the indefinite suspension and has completed the additional 120-day suspension, Norton’s request should be granted. Accordingly, this Court grants Norton’s request for reinstatement and hereby orders that Norton’s suspension be lifted and that his ability to practice law be restored as of the date of this opinion.

*Suspension lifted.*

*All the Justices concur.*
***Exhibit 32.1*****Section 1350 Certification**The undersigned hereby certify that, to their knowledge, **(i)**the Form 10-Q filed byYadkin Valley Financial Corporation (the “Issuer”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2007,fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, and **(ii)**the information contained in that report fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theIssuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.         **Yadkin Valley Financial Corporation**         Date: August 7, 2007 By: /s/ William A. Long           William A. Long    President and Chief Executive Officer           By: /s/ Edwin E. Laws           Edwin E. Laws    Chief Financial Officer  Yadkin Valley Financial Corporation