alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MTB Bank

90 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004-2290
(212) 858-3300
Fax: 858-3449

July 14, 1999

Segue (America) Limited
c/o Hampshire Group Limited
215 Commerce Boulevard
Anderson, South Carolina 29621

Attention: Mr. Charles Clayton

Re: Renewal of Credit Facility

Dear Mr. Clayton:

Reference is made to the Credit Agreement dated February 15, 1995 executed by
and between Segue (America) Limited, formerly named Vintage, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Borrower") and MTB Bank (the "Bank") and the Letter of Credit
and Security Agreement, the Corporate Guarantee executed by Hampshire Group
Limited (the "Corporate Guarantor") and other related loan documents executed in
connection therewith (collectively, the "Loan Documents"). All capitalized terms
used herein and not defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Credit
Agreement.

Effective July 14, 1999, the Borrower and the Bank hereby agree to amend the
Credit Agreement as follows:

     The definition of Termination Date set forth in Section I(f) of the Credit
     Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the date "April 30, 1999" therefrom
     and inserting the date "April 30, 2000" in its place.

Each of the Loan Documents is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing and
except as amended hereby, each such Loan Document remains in full force and
effect in accordance with its terms.

The Corporate Guarantor acknowledges and confirms that the term "Obligations"
referred to in the Corporate Guarantee executed by it includes, without
limitation, the indebtedness, liabilities and obligations of the Borrower under
the Credit Agreement, as amended hereby. The foregoing amendment shall not
affect or impair in any way the validity, binding effect or enforceability of
any Loan Document to which the Borrower or the Corporate Guarantor is party, and
the Borrower's and Guarantor's obligations and the Bank's rights and remedies
thereunder shall continue in full force and effect, notwithstanding such
amendment.

                                       1
<PAGE>
If the foregoing is acceptable to you, kindly execute both copies of this
letter, returning it to MTB Bank, 90 Broad Street, New York, New York
10004-2290, Attn: Mr. Richard Assaf no later than July 31, 1999. Upon receipt by
the Bank of counterparts of this letter duly executed by all the parties listed
below by such date, this letter shall become a binding agreement between the
Bank and the other signatories hereto as of the date first above written.

Very truly yours,

MTB BANK

/s/ Saul M. Langer
-------------------------------
Saul M. Langer
Senior Vice President
Chief Lending Officer


Accepted and Agreed:

SEGUE (AMERICA) LIMITED,
formerly named VINTAGE, INC.

By: /s/ Horace D. Padgett, Jr.
----------------------------------------
Name:  Horace D. Padgett, Jr.
Title: Vice President - Finance



HAMPSHIRE GROUP LIMITED,
as Corporate Guarantor

By: /s/ Charles W. Clayton
---------------------------------------
Name: Charles W. Clayton
Title: Chief Financial Officer







                                        2
Exhibit 10.13

 

[LOGO]

 

CONFIDENTIAL

 

November 14, 2011

 

Mr. Andrew Silberfein
 148 Saddle Hill Road
 Stamford, CT 06903

 

Dear Andrew,

 

Reference is made to that certain Employment Agreement (your “Employment Agreement”) dated as of the date hereof between you and Rouse Properties, Inc. (“Rouse”). All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in your Employment Agreement. This letter confirms that the Board has agreed to exercise their discretion regarding the vesting terms of your Signing Options under the circumstances as follows:

 

In the event your employment is terminated by the Company without Cause, the portion of your Signing Option, if any, that would have vested during the one (1) year period following your termination date (had you continued to be employed by Rouse during such period) shall vest on your termination date, Such portion of your Signing Option may be exercised during the sixty (60) day period immediately following your termination date and, to the extent not exercised prior thereto, shall be forfeited and terminate upon ihe expiration of such sixty (60) day period. For the avoidance of doubt, no other Option Award or any portion thereof shall vest upon your termination of employment, except as may be otherwise set forth in the applicable grant agreement.

 

Except as further set forth in the grant agreement for your Signing Option, this letter agreement, the letter agreement dated as of the date hereof between you and GGP Limited Partnership and the Employment Agreement constitute the entire agreement between you and Rouse with regard to the subject matter hereof, superseding all prior understandings and agreements, whether written or oral. This letter agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, which, when taken together, shall constitute one instrument and may not be amended or revised except by a writing signed by you and Rouse.

 

	
 
    	
Yours sincerely,
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
ROUSE PROPERTIES, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/ Sandeep Mathrani
    
	
 
    	
Name: Sandeep Mathrani
    
	
 
    	
Title: Chief Executive Officer
    


 

	
ACCEPTED AND AGREED:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/ Andrew Silberfein
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Andrew Silberfein
    	
 
    
			


 

[LOGO]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

THOMAS LEE AVERETT,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT; PAUL PENZONE, *

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 15352

D.C. No. 2:16

- cv

- 00163

- DLR

MHB

MEMORANDUM **

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 24, 2017 ***

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON,

Circuit Judges.

Thomas Lee Averett, an Arizona state prisoner and former pretrial detainee,

appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

* Paul Penzone has been substituted for his predecessor, Joseph Arpaio,

as Maricopa County Sheriff under Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2).

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

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

# FILED

MAY 30 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

action alleging constitutional violations arising from defendants’ al leged policy of

allowing female guards to observe male pretrial detainees showering and using the

bathroom on a daily basis . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)

.

Resnick v. Hayes , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) . We vacate and remand.

Averett alleged in his complaint that defendants’ policy of allowing female

detention off

icers to view Averett while showering and performing bodily

functions violated his Fourteen th Amendment rights. The district court dismissed

Averett’s deliberate indifference claim at the screening stage. However , the

district court d id n o t have the benefit of our recent decision in Byrd v. Maricopa

County Board of Superv isors , 845 F. 3d 919 ( 9th Cir. 2017), which h eld that

dismissal under § 1915 ( A ) of a pretrial detainee’s action alleging constitutional

claims arising from a similar poli cy was premature. W e vacate the district court ’s

judgment and remand for further proce edings.

We do not consider allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See

Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Averett’s request for appointment of counsel , set forth in his opening brief,

is denied.

VACAT ED and REMANDED.
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.

The undersigned, Jerry Fowden, Chief Executive Officer of Cott Corporation (the Company), has executed this certification in
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of this Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 4, 2015 (the Report).

The undersigned hereby certifies that to the best of 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 23rd dayof November, 2015.



/s/ Jerry FowdenJerry FowdenChief Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23 - 0307 CITY OF MISSOULA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ROBERT MICHAEL ZERMENO,

Defendant and Appellant

**G RANT**  Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until September 6 2023 , to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court August 1 2023

08/01/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0307
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4143

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus JOHN ZIEGLER, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (7:05-cr-0084-gra) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 24, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Barlow Loggins, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Maxwell Barnes Cauthen, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).*Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). - 2 - PER CURIAM: John Ziegler pled guilty to one count of possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) (West 2000 & Supp. 2006). The district court sentenced Ziegler to forty-six months of imprisonment, the bottom of the applicable advisory Guideline range. On appeal, counsel filed an Anders * brief, in which he states there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but suggests that the district court failed to comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in the guilty plea hearing. Ziegler was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not filed a brief. We affirm. Because Ziegler did not move in the district court to withdraw his guilty plea, his challenge to the adequacy of the Rule 11 hearing is reviewed for plain error. See United States v. Martinez , 277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002). Our review of the plea hearing transcript reveals that the district court conducted a thorough Rule 11 colloquy that assured Ziegler’s plea was made both knowingly and voluntarily. See United States v. DeFusco , 949 F.2d 114, 117, 120 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we find Ziegler’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary and properly accepted by the district court. In accordance with Anders , we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for- 3 - appeal. We therefore affirm Ziegler’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Ziegler, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Ziegler requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Ziegler. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 21, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, November 21, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20I0095. GRIFFINS WAREHOUSE- BAXLEY, LLC v. J. COWART, INC. et al. .
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 17CV379
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 50 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 50

     Providing for an adjournment of the House of Representatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 14, 2016

Mr. McConnell submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
     Providing for an adjournment of the House of Representatives.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That, in consonance with section 132(a) of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946, when the House adjourns on any legislative 
day from Friday, July 15, 2016, through Friday, September 2, 2016, on a 
motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority 
Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 
September 6, 2016, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to 
section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. (a) The Speaker or his designee, after consultation with 
the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of the House 
to reassemble at such place and time as he may designate if, in his 
opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
    (b) After reassembling pursuant to subsection (a), when the House 
adjourns on a motion offered pursuant to this subsection by its 
Majority Leader or his designee, the House shall again stand adjourned 
pursuant to the first section of this concurrent resolution.
                                 <all>
```
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 41054 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
BLADMER MERCADO

- GARCIA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:16

- CR

- 290

- 1

Before KING, HAYNES , and GRAVES , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Bladmer Mercado

Garcia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Mercado

- Garcia h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 18 , 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-41054 Document: 00513956346 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/18/2017No. 16

- 41054

2 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave

to w ithdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-41054 Document: 00513956346 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/18/2017
**Exhibit 32**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION*In connection with the Quarterly Report of Croghan Bancshares, Inc. (the “Corporation”) on Form10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Steven C. Futrell, President and CEOof the Corporation, and Kendall W. Rieman, Treasurer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18U.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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, theconsolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation and itssubsidiary.   /s/ Steven C. Futrell /s/ Kendall W. Rieman   Steven C. Futrell, President and CEO Kendall W. Rieman, Treasurer(Principal Executive Officer) (Principal Financial Officer)   Date: April 28, 2008 Date: April 28, 2008 * This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities ExchangeAct of1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the UnitedStates Code, and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act orotherwise subject to the liability of that Section. This certification shall not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or theExchange Act, except to the extent that the Corporation specifically incorporates thiscertification by reference.
21
Form of Powers of Attorney, dated August 20, 2008



 Exhibit 10.11 
 English Translation 
 Form of Power of Attorney 
 I,                     , citizen of the People’s Republic of
China (the “PRC”) with ID No. of
                                        , is the
shareholder of Beijing Gamease Age Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (“Gamease”) holding 60% equity interest of Gamesase, hereby irrevocably appoint
                     with the following powers and rights during the term of this Power of Attorney: 
 I hereby appoint                      to exercise, on my behalf, all
shareholder’s rights corresponding to the [60%][40%] equity interests of Gamease in accordance with PRC laws and Gamease’s Articles of Association at the shareholders’ meetings of Gamease, including but not limited to the right to
call the shareholder’s meeting, accept the notice regarding the shareholder’s meeting and its agenda, participate in the shareholder’s meeting and exercise the voting right (including elect, designate or appoint the director, general
manager, financial controller or other senior management personnel, the matters of distribution of dividend), to sell or transfer any or all of equity interests of Gamease. 
 Such authorization and appointment are based upon the precondition that                      is acting as an employee
of Beijing AmazGame Age Internet Technology Co., Ltd. (“AmazGame”) and AmazGame agrees in written such authorization and appointment. Once
                     loses his title or position in AmazGame or AmazGame notifies of the termination of such authorization and appointment, I shall
withdraw such authorization and appointment to him immediately and designate/authorize the other individual nominated by AmazGame to exercise the full aforesaid rights on behalf of myself at the shareholders’ meetings of Gamease. If I die, I
agree to transfer the right and obligation pursuant to this Power of Attorney to the person designated by AmazGame. 
 The initial term of this Power of
Attorney is ten (10) years upon the execution date of this Power of Attorney during the duly existing term of Gamease unless the early termination of Operation Agreement jointly executed by AmazGame and Gamease by any reason. If the term
expires, upon the request by AmazGame, I will extend the term of this Power of Attorney. Within the term of this Power of Attorney, this Power of Attorney shall not be revised or terminated without the consent of AmazGame. 
                                        
 (Signature) 
                     , 2008
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-3417 

_____________________________

RANDALL PETERSEN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Coleman Lee Robinson, Judge.

(Date)

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY, WINOKUR, and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Randall Petersen, pro se, Appellant.
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael L. Schaub,

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Amendment No. 2 to the Registrant's 2006 Stock Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.23 
 MASCOMA CORPORATION 
 SECOND AMENDMENT 

TO 

2006 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors and the stockholders of Mascoma Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), approved and adopted the Corporation’s 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan (the “Plan”) on October 26, 2007; 
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company approved and
adopted the Corporation’s First Amendment to the Plan (the “First Amendment”) on January 10, 2010 and the stockholders of the Company approved and adopted the First Amendment on January 25, 2010; and 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment (the “Current Plan”), the Board of
Directors and the stockholders of the Corporation have determined to amend the Current Plan to increase the maximum number of shares of Common Stock (as defined in the Current Plan) that may be issued under the Current Plan as set forth herein.

 NOW, THEREFORE, the Current Plan is amended as follows: 

 

	1.	Amendment to the Current Plan. 

 Section 4 of the Current Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “Stock Subject to Plan. Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 14 below, the maximum number of shares of Common Stock of the Company which may be issued under the Plan is 14,250,000
shares. If an Option shall expire or terminate for any reason without having been exercised in full, the unpurchased shares subject to such Option shall again be available for subsequent Option grants under the Plan. If shares of Restricted Stock
shall be forfeited to, or otherwise repurchased by, the Company pursuant to a Restricted Stock Agreement, such repurchased shares shall again be available for subsequent Option grants or Restricted Stock Awards under the Plan. If shares issued are
tendered to the Company in payment of the exercise price of an Option, such tendered shares shall again be available for subsequent Option grants or Restricted Stock Awards under the Plan.” 

 

	2.	Miscellaneous. 


2.01. Effect. Except as amended hereby, the Current Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

2.02. Defined Terms. All capitalized terms used but not specifically defined herein shall have the same meanings given such
terms in the Current Plan unless the context clearly indicates or dictates a contrary meaning. 
 2.03. Governing
Law. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to its conflict of law rules. 
 ADOPTED BY BOARD OF DIRECTORS: August 12, 2010 
 APPROVED BY STOCKHOLDERS:
August 12, 2010