alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CHICAGO DIRECTORY CO. v. UNITED STATES DIRECTORY CO. et al.

(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

April 22, 1903.)

1. Contempt—Fabricating Evidence.

Defendants adjudged guilty of a contempt of court in fabricating certain pages of a directory alleged to infringe a copyright, and presenting the same to the court as evidence on the hearing of a motion for a preliminary injunction.

¶ 1. See Contempt, vol. 10, Cent. Dig. § 32.

On Motion to Commit Defendants Dwyer and Fallon for Contempt of Court. '

Stephen H. Olin, for the motion.

Charles E. Le Barbier, opposed.

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

The affiant Harry S. Spidell, being absent in Pittsburg, was not produced and tendered to defendants for cross-examination. For that reason his affidavit and the affidavits filed by defendants in answer to it have not been considered, and are no part of the record upon which this decision is based. They may be withdrawn by the parties presenting them.

There are many contradictions in the affidavits presented by the respective parties; but a careful review of the whole case, and an analysis of the evidence afforded by the documents on file, has clearly convinced the court that, subsequent to the service of the order to show cause why injunction should not issue, the defendants fabricated, or caused to be fabricated, 16 pages which were presented on their behalf to the court, as being the first 16 pages of their Chicago section of Directory as the same existed before the motion was made, when in truth and in fact the genuine 16 pages were markedly different therefrom. This- is a very gross piece of contempt, and the only reason the imprisonment prescribed therefor is made so brief is because the same acts constitute a criminal offense, for which, despite the infliction of penalty for contempt, the guilty parties may be imprisoned.

Each of the defendants, Fallon and Dwyer, is fined $1,000, one-half to the United States, one-half to complainant, and is committed to jail for 10 days, and until the said fine is paid.
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 on Form 10-Q of Cynosure, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Michael R. Davin, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |                                                
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------
|Date: November 10, 2008 |  | /s/ Michael R. Davin                           
|                        |  | Michael R. Davin                               
|                        |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
exv10w62









Exhibit 10.62



CERTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED BY BRACKETS, HAS BEEN OMITTED
AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (THE “COMMISSION”) PURSUANT TO RULE
24b-2 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.




Confidential




June 17, 2008




Andrew Gengos

Vice President, Strategy and Corporate Development

Amgen Inc.

One Amgen Center Dr.

Thousand Oaks, CA 91320-1799




Re: Amendment No. 1 to Collaboration and Option Agreement




Dear Andrew,



As you know, Cytokinetics, Incorporated (“CK”) and Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”) are parties
to that certain Collaboration and Option Agreement dated December 29, 2006 (the “Option
Agreement”). By this letter amendment (this “Amendment”), effective as of June 17,
2008, CK and Amgen agree to amend the Option Agreement as follows:





	 	1.	 	Section 2.12.3.1(iii) of the Option Agreement is hereby replaced in its entirety by the
following:






“(iii) reviewing CK’s progress against the activities set forth in the Development
Plan and Schedule 10.2.1 and the potential for Amgen to exercise the Amgen Option...”




	 	2.	 	Schedule 10.2.1 of the Option Agreement (Development Activities) is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety to read as attached hereto.




Except as expressly set forth herein, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement will remain
in full force and effect. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined have the meaning
ascribed in the Option Agreement.



If the foregoing is acceptable and agreed to by Amgen, please so indicate by having an authorized
representative of Amgen sign this Amendment in the appropriate signature line below, and return
such signed copy to Marjorie Wagman, Associate General Counsel, at your earliest convenience. A
duplicate original is enclosed for your records. If you have any questions or comments, please do
not hesitate to contact Marjorie at (650) 624-2925 or by email at mwagman@cytokinetics.com.




	 	 	 	 	 
	Sincerely,	 	Agreed and accepted:
	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Michael S. Rabson	 	Amgen Inc.
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Andrew Gengos
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Michael S. Rabson

	 	Name:
	 	Andrew Gengos
	Sr. Vice President, Business
Development and Legal Affairs,
and

	 	Title:
	 	Vice President
	General Counsel 

	 	Date:
	 	23 June 08






			
	 	 	 
	Amgen Contract No. 200625165-001
	 	1






 









 






Confidential




Exhibit A




Schedule 10.2.1




Development Activities




[attached]




			
	 	 	 
	Amgen Contract No. 200625165-001
	 	2






 









 






Confidential




SCHEDULE 10.2.1




(amended June 17, 2008)




Development Activities




[***]




 




*** Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Commission.
Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions.




			
	 	 	 
	Amgen Contract No. 200625165-001
	 	3
SEC File Nos. 002-33371

811-01880

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 

Washington, D.C. 20549

____________

 

FORM N-1A

 

REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACTOF 1933

 

Post-Effective Amendment No. 77	(X)

 

and

 

REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE INVESTMENT COMPANYACT OF 1940

 

Amendment No. 58	(X)

____________

 

THE INCOME FUND OF AMERICA

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

One Market, Steuart Tower, Suite 2000, SanFrancisco, California 94105-1409

(Address of Principal ExecutiveOffices) (ZIP Code)

 

Registrant's Telephone Number, Including AreaCode: (415) 421-9360

____________

 

Patrick F. Quan

Secretary

The Income Fund of America

One Market

Steuart Tower, Suite 2000

San Francisco, California 94105-1409

 

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

Copy to:

 

Michael Glazer

Bingham McCutchen LLP

355 South Grand Avenue, Suite4400

Los Angeles, CA 90071-3106

(Counsel for the Registrant)

____________

 

Approximate date of proposed public offering:

 

[X]	It is proposed that this filing will becomeeffective on August 29, 2014, pursuant to paragraph (b) of rule 485.
Exhibit 10.26

 

Limited Waiver of Certain Tax and Tax Gross-Up Rights

 

Reference is made to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, effective April 23, 2010 (the “Employment Agreement”), between Dollar General Corporation, a Tennessee corporation (the “Company”), and Richard Dreiling  (“Executive”).  Terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Employment Agreement.

 

In consideration for a one-time salary adjustment, effective January 1, 2013, Executive hereby forever waives the following rights, but solely with respect to the tax and tax gross-up provisions, as set forth in Sections 5(f) and 5(g) of the Employment Agreement:

 

5(f)  ....The Company shall pay Executive’s reasonable legal fees incurred in connection with any consultation with an attorney regarding this Agreement (up to $15,000), “grossed up” for all federal and state income and employment taxes (and for such taxes on such gross-up payment), to the extent any such amount is taxable to Executive, no later than the end of the applicable calendar year in which the expenses were incurred.

 

5(g)  ....To the extent the Company’s payment or reimbursement of Executive’s expenses in relation to his professional club memberships are required to be included in Executive’s income for income tax purposes or as wages for employment tax purposes, the Company will pay to Executive an amount necessary to “gross-up” Executive for state and federal income and employment tax purposes (and for such taxes on such gross-up payment), which gross-up amount shall be paid to Executive no later than the end of the applicable calendar year in which the expenses were incurred.

 

The foregoing limited waiver will become effective January 1, 2013. If the one-time salary adjustment referenced above is not implemented for any reason, the foregoing limited waiver will not become effective.   Executive shall not be deemed to have waived any other rights contained in the Employment Agreement, including any rights set forth in Sections 5(f) and 5(g) thereto, that do not pertain to the specific tax and tax gross-up rights referenced above.

 

 

	
Date:
    	
12/3/2012
    	
 
    	
/s/   Richard W. Dreiling
    
	
 
    	
Richard   W. Dreiling
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Date:
    	
12/3/2012
    	
 
    	
Accepted:   DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   Bob Ravener
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   Bob Ravener
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   EVP, Chief People Person
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jewett-Cameron Trading Company Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:   January 19, 2005                             Signed:   /s/  Donald M. Boone



Donald M. Boone, President/CEO/Treasurer









Date:   January 19, 2005                             Signed:   /s/  Michael C. Nasser



Michael C. Nasser, Corporate Secretary
Exhibit
      23.2
















**CONSENT
      OF
      INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**













We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
      333-97053, 333-115405 on Form S-3, and 333-127889-01, 333-71990-01 and
      333-63101-01 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 28, 2006, relating to
      the
      consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Wisconsin
      Public Service Corporation and subsidiary (which report expresses an unqualified
      opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding the adoption of new
      accounting standards) and of our report dated February 28, 2006 relating to
      management's report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial
      reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Wisconsin Public
      Service Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2005.






/s/
      Deloitte &
Touche LLP






Milwaukee,
      Wisconsin


February
      28,
      2006
NO T F O R P UB LICATIO N IN W E ST' S H AWAII REP ORTS O R TH E P ACIF IC REP O RTER

NO. CAAP-18-0000902 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS O F THE STATE OF HAWAI # I ANTHONY S. BARDIN; GREG ALLEN, SR. and GREG ALLEN, JR.; T HOMAS J. BROOKS; JENNIFER S. BROOKS; MICHAEL CHANDLER; KIRBY B. GUYER; MILTON SEARLES; JOHN R. HOFF TRUST; LORNA E. HOFF TRUST; MICHAEL L. KAISER; TODD SCHRIM; J OHN WARK and SHANNON WARK, Appellants-Appellants, v. PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI/ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, KIMO KEAWE, in his official capacity as Chairperson of the Planning Commission, Appellees-Appellees and BARBARA ROBESON and CAREN DIAMOND, Intervenors-Appellees. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 17-1-0181)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO APPELLANTS JOHN WARK AND SHANNON WARK; MICHAEL CHANDLER; JOHN R. HOFF TRUST AND LORNA E. HOFF TRUST (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, and Chan and Wadsworth, JJ.)

Upon consideration of (1) the September 24, 2020 "Motion for Dismissal of Appeal as to Appellants John Wark and Shannon Wark; Michael Chandler; John R. Hoff Trust and Lorna E. Hoff Trust" (motion to dismiss); (2) the September 30, 2020 statement of no position to the motion to dismiss, filed by Appellees Planning Department of the County of Kaua # i/Planning Commission of the County of Kaua # i, Kimo Keawe, in His Official Capacity as Chairperson of the Planning Commission; and (3) the record, it appears that the Dismissing Appellants move to dismiss the appeal as to themselves, with prejudice. Therefore, Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-18-0000902 28-OCT-2020 07:48 AM Dkt. 109 ORDNO T F O R P UB LICATIO N IN W E ST' S H AWAII REP ORTS O R TH E P ACIF IC REP O RTER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed with prejudice as to the Dismissing Appellants only, pursuant to Hawai # i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b) .

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, October 28, 2020.
/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge
/s/ Derrick H.M. Chan Associate Judge /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge

2
O pinion filed Ma rch 30 , 2018



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

____ _ ______



### No. 11

- 1 8

- 00 072

- C R

_____ __ ____



### DANNY REED DIKE

, Appellan t

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 350 t h District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No

. 12694

- D

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant, Danny Reed Dike

, has filed a motion to dismiss t h is appeal . In the

motion, Appellant acknowledges that he waived his right to appeal and states that

this appeal should be dismissed. The motion is si gned by both Appellant and h is

counsel in accordance with T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4 2.2

. The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

Ma rch 30 , 2018 PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Willson , J., Bailey, J., and Wright, S.C.J. 1

1 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

THE VAN DANG,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-75164

Agency No. A025-092-019

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

The Van Dang, a native and citizen of Vietnam, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting his application for a waiver

of inadmissibility under former section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality

FILED

JAN 04 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-75164

Act. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo

constitutional claims and questions of law, Vargas-Hernandez v. Gonzales, 497

F.3d 919, 921 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny the petition for review.

Contrary to Dang’s contention, the BIA did not exceed its regulatory

authority by engaging in its own fact-finding or conducting a de novo review of the

IJ’s factual findings, but rather properly reviewed de novo whether to grant relief

as a matter of discretion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii) (“The Board may review

questions of . . . discretion . . . de novo.”).

Dang’s contention that the BIA violated due process by failing to consider

evidence of his rehabilitation fails because he has not overcome the presumption

that the BIA did review the record. See Larita-Martinez v. INS, 220 F.3d 1092,

1096 (9th Cir. 2000) (petitioner cannot overcome presumption of record review by

pointing out that the BIA did not specifically mention certain evidence). 

Dang’s contention that the BIA violated due process by mischaracterizing

the facts concerning his mother’s and his children’s deaths fails for lack of

prejudice. See Cruz Rendon v. Holder, 603 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir. 2010)

(petitioner must show prejudice to prevail on a due process claim). His contention

that the BIA mischaracterized the facts concerning past acts of violence is

unsupported by the record. 
3 08-75164

Finally, Dang’s contention that the BIA acted ultra vires by ordering him

removed instead of remanding to the IJ for entry of an order of removal is

foreclosed by Lolong v. Ashcroft, 484 F.3d 1173, 1178 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc)

(where the IJ makes a finding of removability before granting relief, that finding

constitutes an order of removal, and the BIA’s reversal of relief simply reinstates

the IJ’s order).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0000701 19-JAN-2017 10:22 AM
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 459 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 459

   To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to approve 
   waivers under the Medicaid Program under title XIX of the Social 
   Security Act that are related to State provider taxes that exempt 
                    certain retirement communities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 11, 2015

  Mr. Boozman introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to approve 
   waivers under the Medicaid Program under title XIX of the Social 
   Security Act that are related to State provider taxes that exempt 
                    certain retirement communities.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Provider Tax Administrative 
Simplification Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. PROVIDER TAX RULE EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN CONTINUING CARE 
              RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES.

    In the case of a State that has a provider tax that does not apply 
to continuing care retirement communities or life care communities (as 
such terms are used for purposes of section 1917(g) of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396p(g))) that have no beds that are certified 
to provide medical assistance (as such term is defined under section 
1905(a) of such Act) under title XIX of the Social Security Act or that 
do not provide services for which payment may be made under title XIX 
of the Social Security Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
shall approve a waiver under section 433.68(e)(2)(iii) of title 42 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations regardless of whether the Secretary 
determines that the State satisfies the requirements of section 
433.68(e)(2)(iii)(B) of such title.
                                 <all>
```
Written Description of Oral Agreement - Pypo Beijing and Beijing North



 Exhibit 10.59 
 Written description of oral agreement between Beijing Pypo Technology Group Company 
 Limited and
Beijing North Investment Group Limited 
 From October 2003 to August 2005, Beijing Pypo Technology Group Company Limited, or Pypo
Beijing, made cash advances of approximately $6.6 million to Beijing North Investment Group Limited, a former shareholder of Pypo Beijing. These advances were unsecured, interest-free obligations payable on demand. Pypo Beijing made these advances
to meet the short-term working capital requirements of Beijing North Investment Group Limited, which repaid such advances in January 2006.
EXHIBIT 10.1

                            VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.



                            VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.



August 8, 2005

Mr. Carl E. Berg
Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC
10050 Bandley Dr.
Cupertino, CA 95014

Re: Amendment to Assignment Agreement

Dear Mr. Berg:

This letter amendment ("Amendment") is in reference to the Assignment Agreement,
dated as of July 14, 2005 between Valence Technology, Inc. (the "Company") and
Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC ("Berg & Berg") (the "Agreement"). The Agreement is
amended as follows: The following is added to the end of Section 2(b)(ii): ";
provided the conversion price can be no lower than $2.96, the closing bid price
of the Company's common stock on July 13, 2005."

Except as provided herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement
remain unchanged and in effect. This Amendment documents the intent of the
parties at the time of the Agreement that the Series C-2 Preferred Stock would
not be convertible at a price per share less than the closing bid price of the
Company's common stock on July 13, 2005.



                                            Sincerely,

                                            VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.



                                            /s/ Kevin W. Mischnick
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Kevin W. Mischnick
                                            VP of Finance

ACCEPTED AND AGREED:

BERG & BERG ENTERPRISES, LLC

/s/ Carl E. Berg
Carl E. Berg, Managing Member





                                       42
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors andShareholders 

Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement Nos. 333-139630, 333-147417, 333-156041, and 333-162867 on Form S-8 of Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. of our reports datedAugust 29, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of June 29, 2011 and June 30, 2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations,shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 29, 2011, and the related financial statement schedule II, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as ofJune 29, 2011, which reports appears in the June 29, 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. 

Our report on theconsolidated financial statements refers to the adoption of ASC Topic 805, “Business Combinations” on June 25, 2009. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

KPMG LLP 

Jacksonville, Florida 

Certified PublicAccountants 

August 29, 2011