alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tenth Amendment to Employment Agreement


 Exhibit 10.7 
 TENTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 This Tenth Amendment to Employment Agreement is made and
entered into as of January 1, 2007, by and between PriceSmart, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (“Employer”) and Thomas Martin (“Executive”). 
 Recitals 
  

	A)	On March 31, 1998 an Employment Agreement was made and entered into by and between Employer and Executive. 

  

	B)	Said Employment Agreement has been amended on nine prior occasions; 

  

	C)	Employer and Executive now desire to amend the Employment Agreement, as set forth hereinbelow: 

 Agreement 
  

	1.	Section 2.1 of the Agreement which provides: 

 2.1
Salary. For Executive’s services hereunder, Employer shall pay as base salary to Executive the amount of $221,500 during each year of the Employment Term. Said salary shall be payable in equal installments in conformity with
Employer’s normal payroll period. Executive shall receive such salary increases, if any, as Employer, in its sole discretion, shall determine. 
 is hereby amended, effective January 1, 2007, to provide as follows: 
 2.1 Salary. For Executive’s services
hereunder, Employer shall pay as base salary to Executive the amount of $228,200 during each year of the Employment Term. Said salary shall be payable in equal installments in conformity with Employer’s normal payroll period. Executive shall
receive such salary increases, if any, as Employer, in its sole discretion, shall determine. 
  

	2.	All other terms of the Employment Agreement, as amended, shall remain unaltered and fully effective. 

 Executed in San Diego, California, as of the date first written above. 
  

							
	EXECUTIVE	 		 	EMPLOYER
			
		 		 	PRICESMART, INC.
				
	Thomas Martin	 		 	By:	 	  

	  
	 		 	Name:	 	Jose Luis Laparte
		 		 	Its:	 	President
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned executive officers of PVF Capital Corp. (the Registrant) hereby certify that this Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2012 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



By:

/s/ Robert J. King, JrName:

Robert J. King, Jr.Title:

President and Chief Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ James H. NicholsonName:

James H. NicholsonTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


Date: September 21, 2012
[No. 42287-5-II.

Division Two.

November 6, 2012.]

#### Harold Gene Davis et al., *Appellants,*v. Pleasant Forest Camping Club et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Thurston County, No. 07-2-02446-5, Paula Casey, J., entered July 7, 2011 *.Affirmed in part*and *remanded with instructions*by unpublished opinion per

Penoyar, J.,

concurred in by Johanson, A.C.J.; Quinn-Brintnall, J., concurring separately.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      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)
    
    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; andc)
    
    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 effect, the
Registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  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/ John J. DeeJohn J. Dee
     Chief Financial Officer and
     Senior Vice President
     (Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit      21**

**Subsidiaries      of the Registrant**

|  Subsidiaries                (a)    | Percentageof                Ownership | Jurisdiction                orState                of Incorporation |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                     |                                  |                                                                |
| Cascade                Bank              | 100%                                  | Washington                                                          |
| Cascade                Capital Trust I   | 100%                                  | Delaware                                                            |
| Cascade                Capital Trust II  | 100%                                  | Delaware                                                            |
| Cascade                Capital Trust III | 100%                                  | Delaware                                                            |

| (a) | The                operation of the Corporation’s wholly owned subsidiaries are included in                the Corporation’s Financial Statements contained in the Annual Report                attached hereto as Exhibit                13. |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-17-00849-CV

In re Richard W. Jackson and Lisa C. Jackson

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. 03-17-00846-CV

Richard W. Jackson and Lisa C. Jackson, Appellants

v.

Janice Cox and Helen Ramsey, Appellees

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. C-1-CV-17-001833, HONORABLE TODD T. WONG, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R AND M E M O R AN D U M O P I N I O N

PER CURIAM

Relators’ amended petition for writ of mandamus is denied, and their emergency

motion to stay trial and the trial court order dissolving temporary injunction pending resolution of

this mandamus petition is dismissed as moot. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

We grant Relators’ emergencymotion to stay trial and the trial court order dissolving

temporary injunction in the underlying case, No. C-1-CV-17-001833, Richard W. Jackson, et al. v.
Janice Cox, et al., in the County Court at Law No. 2 of Travis County, pending our decision in

Relators’ interlocutory appeal, No. 03-17-00846-CV, Richard W. Jackson and Lisa C. Jackson v.

Janice Cox and Helen Ramsey.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Field and Goodwin

03-17-00849-CV Denied

03-17-00846-CV Ordered

Filed: January 12, 2018

2
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3376 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to ensure the traditional right of 

self-defense of United States mariners against acts of piracy, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2009 

Mr. LOBIONDO (for himself and Mr. CUMMINGS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 46, United States Code, to ensure the traditional right of self-defense of United States mariners 

against acts of piracy, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘United States Mariner 

5 and Vessel Protection Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. USE FORCE AGAINST PIRACY. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 81 of title 46, United 

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing new section: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3376 IH

1 ‘‘§ 8107. Use of force against piracy 

2 ‘‘An owner, operator, time charterer, master, or mar3 iner who uses force, or authorizes the use of force, to de4 fend a vessel of the United States against an act of piracy 

5 shall not be liable for any injury or death caused by such 

6 force to any person participating in the act of piracy.’’. 

7 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The analysis at the be8 ginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end 

9 the following new item: 

‘‘8107. Use of force against piracy.’’. 

10 SEC. 3. AGREEMENTS. 

11 To carry out the purpose of this Act, the Secretary 

12 of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating 

13 shall work through the International Maritime Organiza14 tion to establish agreements to promote coordinated action 

15 among flag- and port-states to deter, protect against, and 

16 rapidly respond to acts of piracy against the vessels of, 

17 and in the waters under the jurisdiction of, those nations, 

18 and to ensure limitations on liability similar to those es19 tablished by section 8107 of title 46, United States Code, 

20 as amended by this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Rudy Rolando QUAN-MOLINA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-40599

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 19, 2011.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly Estelle Odom, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

*391PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rudy Rolando Quan-Molina has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Quan-Molina has 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 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                                 iVideoNow, Inc.
                        383 Inverness Parkway, Suite 100
                               Englewood, CO 80112


                            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 iVideoNow,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30,2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I Kevin R. Keating,
President of the Company,  certify, to the best of my knowledge,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss 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 the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







                             /s/  Kevin  R.  Keating
                             --------------------------------
                             Kevin  R.  Keating
                             President and Chief Financial Officer
                             iVideoNow,  Inc.

                             October 27, 2003



                                       13
[No. 67206-1-I.

Division One.

November 13, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Tjuan Leon Blye, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 10-1-00550-6, Eric Z. Lucas, J., entered May 27, 2011. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per

Spear-man, J.,

concurred in by Leach, C.J., and Dwyer, J.
#### Philip D. Rupert, Jr., Appellant, v Gates & Adams, P.C., et al., Respondents. Philip D. Rupert, Jr, Appellant, v Gates & Adams, P.C., et al., Respondents.

(Appeal No. 1.)

(Appeal No. 2.)

[858 NYS2d 646]

Motion for reargument denied. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Fahey, Green and Pine, JJ.
#### In the Matter of James Fennell, Respondent, v City School District of City of Long Beach, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 185]

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim or to deem a late no*785tice of claim to have been timely served, the City School District of City of Long Beach appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bruno, J.), dated June 10, 2013, as, upon reargument and renewal, adhered to a prior determination made in an order of the same court entered November 28, 2012, granting the petition.

Ordered that the order dated June 10, 2013, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Upon renewal, the Supreme Court properly adhered to its original determination granting the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim or to deem a late notice of claim to have been timely served (see *Matter of Fennell v City Sch. Dist. of City of Long Beach,*118 AD3d 783 [2014] [decided herewith]). The new affidavit submitted by the appellant would not have changed the original determination.

Rivera, J.R, Dickerson, Chambers, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 24.1

ROSETTA STONE INC.

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Each person whose signature appears below hereby constitutes and appoints Tom P. H. Adams and Michael C. Wu, or either of them, each
with power to act without the other, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and
stead, in any and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Rosetta Stone Inc. (the "Company") and any or all
subsequent amendments and supplements to the Annual Report on Form 10-K, and to file the same, or cause to be filed the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in
connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto each said attorney-in-fact and agent full power to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby qualifying and confirming all that said
attorney-in-fact and agent or his substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Each
person whose signature appears below may at any time revoke this power of attorney as to himself or herself only by an instrument in writing specifying that this power of attorney
is revoked as to him or her as of the date of execution of such instrument or at a subsequent specified date. This power of attorney shall be revoked automatically with respect to any person whose
signature appears below effective on the date he or she ceases to be a member of the Board of Directors or an officer of the Company. Any revocation hereof shall not void or otherwise affect any acts
performed by any
attorney-in-fact and agent named herein pursuant to this power of attorney prior to the effective date of such revocation.

Dated:
March 14, 2011

Signature

Title/s/ TOM P. H. ADAMS Tom P. H. Adams

Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ STEPHEN M. SWAD Stephen M. Swad

Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)/s/ LAURENCE FRANKLIN Laurence Franklin

Chairman of the Board, Director/s/ PHILLIP A. CLOUGH Phillip A. Clough

Director/s/ JOHN T. COLEMAN John T. Coleman

Director/s/ PATRICK W. GROSS Patrick W. Gross

Director/s/ THEODORE J. LEONSIS Theodore J. Leonsis

Director/s/ JOHN E. LINDAHL John E. Lindahl

Director/s/ LAURA L. WITT Laura L. Witt

Director


---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22455]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10169]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported 
for Exhibition Determinations: ``Painted in Mexico, 1700-1790: Pinxit 
Mexici'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that certain objects to be included in the exhibition 
``Painted in Mexico, 1700-1790: Pinxit Mexici,'' imported from abroad 
for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with 
the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at the Los Angeles County Museum of 
Art, Los Angeles, California, from on or about November 19, 2017, until 
on or about March 18, 2018, at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New 
York, New York, from on or about April 24, 2018, until on or about July 
22, 2018, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, is in the national interest.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the imported objects, contact Elliot Chiu in the Office of the 
Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; 
email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#87f4e2e4f3eee8e9b5b3b2bec7f4f3e6f3e2a9e0e8f1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d7e686e796462633f3938344d7e796c7968236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. Department 
of State, L/PD, SA-5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the 
Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, 
et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 
of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 
2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257-1 of 
December 11, 2015). I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
determinations be published in the Federal Register.

Alyson Grunder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2017-22455 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Northport Investments,
  Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30,
  2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
  (the Report), I, Stephen Dadson, Chief Executive 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:

(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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Stephen Dadson
  Stephen Dadson
  Chief Executive Officer

August 7, 2003

---
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 23



Board of Directors and Stockholders
Cecil Bancorp, Inc.
Elkton, Maryland



                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form
10-KSB) of Cecil Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report dated January 16,
1997, included in the 1996 Annual Report to Stockholders of Cecil Bancorp, Inc.

     We also consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statements (Form 10-KSB Number 0-24926) of Cecil Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiaries
of our report dated January 16, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements incorporated herein by reference.

                                        Simon Master & Sidlow, P.A.



Wilmington, Delaware
January 16, 1997
[No. 29951-1-III.

Division Three.

October 2, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Paul Scott Bickle, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Whitman County, No. 10-1-00170-5, David Frazier, J., entered May 10, 2011. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per

Siddoway, J.,

concurred in by Korsmo, C.J., and Sweeney, J.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM A. WHITE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:13-cr-00013-GEC-1; 7:18-cv-81307-GECRSB)

Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 18, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William A. White, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

William A. White seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive and denying reconsideration. The orders are

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 

U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the 

district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that 

the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim 

of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that White has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED