alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment Borrower
 WITNESSETH
 LCPI Administrative Agent Lenders Credit Agreement
 Calfee Loan Prepayment
    Defined Terms




---



##### 



Amendment
 Section 1.1 (Defined Terms)
 Applicable Margin
 Base Rate
    
    EurodollarLoans
    
    LoansRevolving Credit Facility (including Swing Line
Loans)
    
    
    1.75
    %
    
    
    2.75
    %Term Loan Facility
    
    
    2.50
    %
    
    
    3.50
    %
 provided
 Base Rate plus 1 2 Prime Rate
 Eurodollar Base Rate
 -2-




---



##### 



Pricing Grid
 Applicable Margin for Base
    
    Applicable Margin forRate Loans
    
    Eurodollar LoansConsolidated Leverage
    
    Revolving
    
    
    
    
    
    RevolvingRatio
    
    Credit Facility
    
    Term Facility
    
    Credit Facility
    
    Term Facility> 3.50 to 1.00
    
    
    2.25
    %
    
    
    2.75
    %
    
    
    3.25
    %
    
    
    3.75
    %≤3.50 to 1.00 and
> 3.00 to 1.00
    
    
    2.00
    %
    
    
    2.50
    %
    
    
    3.00
    %
    
    
    3.50
    %≤ 3.00 to 1.00
    
    
    1.75
    %
    
    
    2.50
    %
    
    
    2.75
    %
    
    
    3.50
    %
 Adjustment Date
 Section 1.1 (Defined Terms)
 Ninth Amendment
 Ninth Amendment Effective Date
 -3-




---



##### 



Consent to Calfee Loan Prepayment
 Conditions to Effectiveness Ninth Amendment Effective Date
 Amendment
 Acknowledgment and Consent
 Projections Pro Forma Projections
 Amendment Fee Signing Lenders
 -4-




---



##### 



No Defaults
 Representations and Warranties
 Fees, etc
 Representations and Warranties
 Amendment
Documents Amended Credit Agreement
   -5-




---



##### 



Payment of Expenses
 Limited Effect
 GOVERNING LAW
 Miscellaneous
  -6-




---



##### 



MAPCO EXPRESS, INC., as the BorrowerBy:
    /s/ Edward MorganName:Title:By:
    /s/ Gregory A. IntemannName:Title:
    Treasurer




---



##### 



LEHMAN COMMERCIAL PAPER INC., as Administrative AgentBy:
    /s/ Frank P. TurnerName:
    Frank P. TurnerTitle:
    Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 325 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 325

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
     Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
participate in the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration 
                                Project.

    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 ``Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and 
Riparian Restoration Project''.

SEC. 2. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.

    (a) In General.--The Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study 
and Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, title XVI; 43 U.S.C. 390h et 
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 16__. AVRA/BLACK WASH RECLAMATION AND RIPARIAN RESTORATION 
              PROJECT, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA.

    ``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary, in cooperation with Pima 
County, Arizona, may participate in the planning, design, and 
construction of water recycling facilities and to enhance and restore 
riparian habitat in the Black Wash Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Avra 
Valley west of the metropolitan Pima County area.
    ``(b) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of the project 
described in subsection (a) shall not exceed 25 percent of the cost of 
the project.
    ``(c) Limitation.--Federal funds provided under this section shall 
not be used for operation or maintenance of the project described in 
subsection (a).
    ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to carry out this section $14,000,000.
    ``(e) Use of Funds.--Federal funds provided under this section 
shall only be used for the design, planning and construction of water-
related infrastructure.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for Public Law 102-
575 is amended by inserting after the last item relating to title XVI 
the following:

``Sec. 16__. Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration 
                            Project, Pima County, Arizona.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 2, 2009.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 325

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
     Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
participate in the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration 
                                Project.
```
2005 Service Fee Pricing Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.13 
 2005 Service Fee Pricing Agreement 
 Under the Exclusive Technical Service Agreement 

Between 
 Shanghai Acorn
Advertising Broadcasting Co., Ltd. 
 And Acorn Information Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 
 Pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 of the Exclusive Technical Service Agreement entered into on January 1, 2005 in Beijing between Shanghai Acorn
Advertising Broadcasting Co. Ltd. (hereinafter “Party A”) and Acorn Information Technology (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. (“Party B”, Party A and Party B may hereinafter be referred collectively as the
“Parties”), Party A and Party B hereby enter into the following 2005 Service Fee Pricing Agreement: 
  

	1.	Party B’s technical staff will provide to Party A technical services. After friendly negotiations between the two Parties, it is agreed that Party B will collect RMB 400,000
from Party A as technical service charge. 

  

	2.	Party B shall have the right to adjust the annual rate of its technical service charge in accordance with the nature and amount of such services. 

 This agreement, after being executed by Party A and Party B, shall be a valid component of the Exclusive Technical Service Agreement, and shall be bound
by the provisions thereunder. 
 This agreement is executed by both Parties on December 31, 2005 in two counterparts, with one for each
of the Parties. 
 Party A: Shanghai Acorn Advertising Broadcasting Co., Ltd. 
 Legal Representative: Yang Dongjie (signature) 
 Party B: Acorn Information Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 
 Legal Representative: Yang Dong Jie (signature)
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of STRATS Trust For Procter & Gamble Securities, Series 2006-1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);




2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;




4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and




5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.








|Dated: March 30, 2016 | By:                                                       | /s/ Barbara Garafalo | 
|--------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------- | 
|                      |                                                           | Barbara Garafalo     | 
|                      |                                                           | Vice President       | 
|                      | (senior officer of depositor in charge of securitization) |
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Viva
International, Inc. for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2004, I, Robert J. Scott,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Viva International, Inc.
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

     1.   Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,
          2004, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
          the period ended March 31, 2004, fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
          Viva International, Inc.

Dated:  May 25, 2004

VIVA INTERNATIONAL, INC.



/s/    Robert J. Scott
---------------------------
Robert J. Scott
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
#### Thomas M. Hughes, Respondent, v City of Niagara Falls, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[666 NYS2d 534]

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: This matter was previously before our Court on an appeal from an order granting the motion of defendant City of Niagara Falls (City) for summary judgment *(Hughes v City of Niagara Falls,*225 AD2d 1059). We reversed and reinstated the complaint on the ground that the prior written notice requirement of the City Charter, relied upon by the City, was invalid and on the further ground that “[t]here is a question of fact whether the City had constructive notice of the decayed tree limb” *(Hughes v City of Niagara Falls, supra,*at 1060). The City then made a second motion for summary judgment on the ground that its conduct was not the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Supreme Court properly denied that motion. We have repeatedly stated that successive summary judgment motions “should be discouraged in the absence of a showing of newly discovered evidence or other sufficient cause” *(Marine Midland Bank v Fisher,*85 AD2d 905, 906). The issue of proximate cause is generally for the finder of fact to resolve *(see, Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp.,*51 NY2d 308, 315, *rearg denied 52*NY2d 784). Furthermore, the City failed to offer a sufficient excuse for fail*1119ing to raise the issue of proximate cause on its prior motion. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Koshian, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.
#### Kenneth M. SUTTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John GAY, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 07-36019.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 7, 2011.*

Filed March 14, 2011.

Kenneth M. Sutton, Florence, AZ, pro se.

Alex A. Kostin, Esq., Office of the Washington Attorney General, Olympia, WA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: McKEOWN, FISHER and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Kenneth M. Sutton petitions for habeas corpus relief after being convicted of burglary and assault and receiving a 152-month sentence. His petition is subject to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. *See Furman v. Wood,*190 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir.1999). The district court denied Sutton’s petition. We review de novo, and affirm. *See Beardslee v. Woodford,*358 F.3d 560, 568 (9th Cir.2004).

Sutton was not denied a “meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense” when the trial court refused to permit his cousin to testify. *Crane v. Kentucky,*476 U.S. 683, 690, 106 S.Ct. 2142, 90 L.Ed.2d 636 (1986). “A defendant has no right ... to present irrelevant evidence,” and the excluded testimony was not relevant because it would have established only that the victim was also assaulted by another person days after the assault for which Sutton was charged. *Wood v. State of Alaska,*957 F.2d 1544, 1549 (9th Cir.1992); *see also Holmes v. South Carolina,*547 U.S. 319, 326-27, 126 S.Ct. 1727, 164 L.Ed.2d 503 (2006).

The trial court did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by imposing two weapon enhancements to Sutton’s sentence based on his use of the same deadly weapon against the same victim during the commission of the separate crimes of burglary and assault. “With respect to cumulative sentences imposed in a single trial, the Double Jeopardy Clause does no more *703than prevent the sentencing court from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended.” *Missouri v. Hunter,*459 U.S. 359, 366, 103 S.Ct. 673, 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983). In determining whether the Washington state legislature intended courts to impose two weapon enhancements in cases like this one, we are bound to accept the Washington courts’ construction of that state’s statutes. *See id.*at 368, 103 S.Ct. 673. The Washington Supreme Court explicitly stated, in rejecting Sutton’s request for review, that the statute at issue “required” the trial court “to impose two consecutive deadly weapon enhancements.” *See also State v. Huested,*118 Wash.App. 92, 74 P.3d 672, 673 (2003) (“This statute unambiguously shows legislative intent to impose two enhancements based on a single act of possessing a weapon, where there are two offenses eligible for an enhancement.”). Accordingly, there was no double jeopardy violation.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID SBIR Phase II Clinical Trial Implementation Cooperative Agreement (U44).                    

*Date:*                         November 17, 2017.                    

*Time:*                         1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Vasundhara Varthakavi, Ph.D., DVM, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3E70, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5020,                         *varthakaviv@niaid.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 18, 2017.

Natasha M. Copeland,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2017-22967 Filed 10-23-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
##### 



DELAWARE








I, HARRIET SMITH WINDSOR, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY
OF THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF FORWARD ACQUISITION
CORP., FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON
THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, A.D. 2006, AT 5:37 OCLOCK P.M.

A FILED COPY OF THIS CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO THE NEW
CASTLE COUNTY RECORDER OF DEEDS.



| |                              
| | -----------------------------
| | /s/
    Harriet Smith Windsor

| |                                          
| | -----------------------------------------
| |                                          
| | Harriet Smith Windsor, Secretary of State
| | AUTHENTICATION: 4197920                  








---



##### 



State of Delaware
    Secretary of State
    Division of Corporations
    Delivered 05:57 PM 09/30/2005
    FILED 05:37 PM 09/30/2005
    SRV 050805209 - 4034452 FILE
  CERTIFICATE
    OF INCORPORATION
    OF
    FORWARD ACQUISITION CORP.
  DGCL
  FIRST Corporation
  SECOND
  THIRD
  FOURTH
  FIFTH
  SIXTH
  SEVENTH




---



##### 



EIGHTH:
  NINTH:
  TENTH:
  th
  Robert
    J. Bush
     2
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3547 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 936 South 250 East in Provo, Utah, as the 

‘‘Rex E. Lee Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3547 EH

1 SECTION 1. REX E. LEE POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 936 South 250 East in Provo, 

4 Utah, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Rex E. Lee 

5 Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Rex E. Lee Post Of10 fice Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 7, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3547 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostBuilding’’. Provo, Utah, as the ‘‘Rex E. Lee Post Office al Service located at 936 South 250 East in
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Alarion Financial
Services, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Jon M. Kurtz, Principal Executive Officer, President, and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of and for the period covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                                          
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: March 25, 2010 |  | By: |  | /s/ Jon M. Kurtz                         
|                     |  |     |  | Jon M. Kurtz, Principal Executive Officer
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3440 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow dealers in real estate 

to use the installment sales method. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2009 

Mr. PASCRELL (for himself, Mr. ROSKAM, Mr. ADLER of New Jersey, Mr. 

LANCE, and Mr. CANTOR) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 

dealers in real estate to use the installment sales method. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DEALERS IN REAL ESTATE ALLOWED TO USE 

4 INSTALLMENT SALES METHOD. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 453(l) 

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read 

7 as follows: 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘dealer disposi9 tion’ means any disposition of personal property by 

10 a person who regularly sells or otherwise disposes of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3440 IH

1 personal property of the same type on the install2 ment plan.’’. 

3 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

4 (1) Paragraph (2) of section 453(l) of such 

5 Code is amended— 

6 (A) by striking subparagraph (B), 

7 (B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as 

8 subparagraph (B), and 

9 (C) by striking ‘‘or (B)’’ in subparagraph 

10 (B), as redesignated by this paragraph. 

11 (2) Subsection (l) of section 453 of such Code 

12 is amended by striking paragraph (3). 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

14 this section shall apply to dispositions of property after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 31.1(b)**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, William C. Rankin, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 of GeoMet, Inc.; and

 

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.

 

Date: April 28, 2014

 
| By     | /s/ WILLIAM C. RANKIN  |   |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------|
|   | **William C. Rankin,**      |   |
|   | **Chief Executive Officer** |   |

 

1

----