alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Offer Letter



 Exhibit 10.16 
 February 4, 2007 
 Mark Kent 
 1135 Palomar Drive

 Redwood City, CA 94062 
 Dear Mark: 
 We are delighted to offer you a position as the Chief Financial Officer, reporting to Thinh Tran, President and Chief Executive Officer of Sigma Designs, Inc. This is an
exempt position with an initial bi-weekly rate equivalent to $225,000 per year. 
 Additionally, you are offered a time-time sign-on incentive bonus of
$25,000.00. You agree that if you voluntarily terminate your employment with Sigma Designs within one year of your hire date, on your last day you will reimburse this sign-on bonus in full to Sigma Designs. 
 We will recommend to the Board of Directors that you be granted an option for 120,000 shares of Sigma Designs stock under our ISO plan. The vesting period will be five
(5) years (20% per year) and the price will be the market price on the date of the grant. 
 As a regular employee of the Company, you will be eligible
to participate in a number of Company-sponsored benefits, including those that are described in the benefits summary. Employment with the Company is not for a specific term and can be terminated by you or by the Company at any time, for any reason,
with or without cause. Any contrary representations which may have been made or which may be made to you, are superseded by this offer. Any additions to or modifications of this term of your employment would have to be made in writing and signed by
you and the President of the Company. This offer is contingent upon your executing an Employee Confidential Information Agreement. If you accept the offer, the terms described in this letter shall be the terms of your employment. 
 Mark, we are excited about having you join us and look forward to a beneficial and fruitful relationship for you and the Company. 
 To indicate your acceptance, please sign and return to me one original of this letter. This offer will remain valid through February 5, 2007, and I hope to have
your acceptance well before that time. 
  

	
	 Sincerely,

	
	 /s/ Maggie Anderson

	 Maggie Anderson

	 Human Resources Director


 ACKNOWLEDGMENT & ACCEPTANCE 
 I have read, understand and accept, the above-described terms and conditions of employment and will join Sigma Designs on 2/5/07. 
  

									
	 Signed:
	 	 /s/ Mark R. Kent
	 		 	Date:	 	 2/5/07
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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB ("Form 10-KSB") of Intervia Inc. (the "Company") for the annual period ended January 31, 2007 as filed with

the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Glenn Morimoto, 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 Form 10-KSB 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all

material respects, the financial condition and results of operations

of the Company.



/s/ Glenn Morimoto

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

Glenn Morimoto

Chief Executive Officer

May 17, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 50418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23684]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9970-18-Region 6]


Notice of Proposed Administrative Settlement Pursuant to the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended 
(``CERCLA''), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative 
settlement concerning the Bandera Road Ground Water Plume Superfund 
Site, located in City of Leon Valley, Bexar County, Texas.
    The settlement requires Savings Square Partners, Ltd., settling 
party, to pay a total of $1,820,000 as payment of past response costs 
to the Hazardous Substances Superfund. The settlement includes a 
covenant not to sue pursuant to sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 
U.S.C. 9606 and 9607(a).
    For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this 
notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to this 
notice and will receive written comments relating to the settlement. 
The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or 
withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose 
facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is 
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. The Agency's response to any 
comments received will be available for public inspection at 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement and additional background 
information relating to the settlement are available for public 
inspection at 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. A copy of the 
proposed settlement may be obtained from Lawrence Andrews, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 or by calling (214) 665-7397. Comments 
should reference the Bandera Road Ground Water Plume Superfund Site, 
City of Leon, Bexar County, Texas, and EPA Docket Number 06-06-17 and 
should be addressed to Lawrence Andrews at the address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacob Piehl, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, 
Texas 75202-2733 or call (214) 665-2138.

    Dated: October 16, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2017-23684 Filed 10-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Joseph Kelly LARA, also known as Nick DeAngelis Mancuso, also known as J. Kelly Armani, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-11136

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 19, 2011.

Susan Cowger, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

James G. Walker, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Joseph Kelly Lara, Oakdale, LA, pro se.

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Joseph Kelly Lara 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). Lara 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 fui'ther 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 die limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3547 

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’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 

Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, and Mr. MATHESON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

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, 

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

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

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

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

7 Post Office Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3547 IH

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

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Rex E. Lee Post Of3 fice Building’’. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### Serguei Batkhine, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

[987 NYS2d 629]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants New York City Transit Authority, Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Access-A-Ride, MV Transportation, and Keith J. Davis appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Baynes, J.), dated September 18, 2013, which denied their motion pursuant to CFLR 511 (b) and 505 (b) to change venue from Kings County to Richmond County.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion pursuant to CPLR 511 (b) and 505 (b) to change venue *931from Kings County to Richmond County is granted, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, all papers filed in this action and certified copies of all minutes and entries *(see*CPLR 511 [d]).

CPLR 505 (b) provides, in pertinent part, that the “place of trial of an action against the New York city transit authority shall be in the county within the city of New York in which the cause of action arose.” Here, in support of their motion pursuant to CPLR 511 (b) and 505 (b) to transfer venue to Richmond County, the appellants established that the action arose in Richmond County and that the New York City Transit Authority is a defendant *(see Hes v New York City Tr. Auth.,*25 AD3d 762 [2006]; *Bukoff v New York City Tr. Auth.,*184 AD2d 610, 611 [1992]). In opposition, the plaintiff did not dispute these facts, and did not cross-move to retain venue in Kings County pursuant to CPLR 510 (3) *(see Carobert v Baldor Elec. Co.,*102 AD3d 905, 906 [2013]; *McManmon v York Hill Hous., Inc.,*73 AD3d 1137, 1138 [2010]; *Fisher v Finnegan-Curtis,*8 AD3d 527, 528 [2004]). In any event, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that venue should be retained in Kings County based on the convenience of nonparty witnesses *(see Nova Cas. Co. v RPE, LLC,*115 AD3d 717, 718 [2014]; *Zervos v Vargas,*105 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2013]; *O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp.,*207 AD2d 169, 172-173 [1995]). Accordingly, the appellants’ motion to transfer venue to Richmond County pursuant to CPLR 511 (b) and 505 (b) should have been granted.

Balkin, J.E, Roman, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.
#### Ignacio GOMEZ-GOMEZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-71329.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 22, 2008.*

Filed May 5, 2008.

Robert G. Berke, Burke Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Michele Y.F. Sarko, Attorney, M. Jocelyn Wright, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Ignacio Gomez-Gomez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. *706§ 1252. Reviewing de novo, *SandovalLua v. Gonzales,*499 F.3d 1121, 1126 (9th Cir.2007), we grant the petition and remand for further proceedings.

The BIA erred in concluding that Gomez-Gomez was convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude. With respect to the 1997 offense, “[w]e have before us a record of conviction that is inconclusive,” *id.*at 1132, regarding whether the charge resulted in a “cite and release.” Gomez-Gomez has therefore met his burden of showing that he was not convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude. *Id.*We remand for reconsideration of his application for cancellation of removal and, if necessary, his eligibility for voluntary departure.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Darrel G. JONES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-30623

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 21, 2011.

Diane Hollenshead Copes, Esq., U.S. Attorney’s Office, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Raymond Steven Sussman, Esq., Suss-man Law Firm, Brooklyn, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Darrel G. Jones, federal prisoner # 30209-048, filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 mo*404tion, challenging his convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking offense and his aggregate 248-month sentences. The district court found that Jones’s § 2255 motion was successive and transferred the case to this court for a determination whether Jones was entitled to authorization to proceed. Jones currently seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration of this transfer order.

If necessary, this court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction sua sponte. *Mosley v. Cozby,*813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). The order denying Jones’s motion to reconsider the order transferring his § 2255 motion to this court is a non-appealable interlocutory order. *See*28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292(a), (b); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(a), 59(e); *Brinar v. Williamson,*245 F.3d 515, 516-18 (5th Cir.2001). This court is without jurisdiction to consider Jones’s request for a COA. Consequently, the motion for a COA is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

*

 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.
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a - 14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT 0F 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Robert Thele certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of CoConnect, Inc.  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.  4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a -15(e) and 15d -15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my 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; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.    /s/ Robert Thele Robert Thele, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)  August 21, 2006
I, Chen
Guocheng, Chief Financial Officer of China Tractor Holdings, Inc. hereby certify
that:




1. I have
reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of China Tractor Holdings,
Inc.;




2. Based
on my knowledge, this Annual 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 Annual
Report;




3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this Annual Report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this Annual Report;




4. The
Registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15 and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:




(a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this Annual Report is being prepared;




(b)
designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;




(c)
evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this Annual 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; and




(d)
disclosed in this Annual Report any change in the Registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most recent
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and




5. The
Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation, to the Registrant's auditors and to the audit committee of
Registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):




(a) all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and




(b) any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the Registrant's internal controls.





Dated:
April 15, 2010




/s/
      Chen GuochengChen
      GuochengChief
      Financial Officer
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T J UL Y 17, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o

. 0 8

- 1 3 3 1 7

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 6

- 2 0 6 2 4

- C V

- A S G

P Y C S A P A N A M A , S

. A

. ,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l a n t ,

v e r s u s

T E N S A R E A R T H T E C H N O L O G I E S , I N C

. , a G e o r g i a c o r p o r a t i o n ,
D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l e e ,
T H O M A S E

. S C O T T ,
S p e c i a l M a s t e r

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f F l o r i d a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( J u l y 1 7 , 2 0 0 9 )

B e f o r e D U B I N A , C h i e f J u d g e , B I R C H a n d W I L S O N , C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.P E R C U R I A M :

T h i s i s a n a p p e a l f

r o m t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s g r a n t i n g T e n s a r E a r t h

T e c h n o l o g i e s , I n c

. ’ s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

. A f t e r a c a r e f

u l r e v i e w o f t h e

r e c o r d , r e v i e w o f t h e p a r t i e s ’ b r i e f s , a n d h a v i n g t h e b e n e f

i t o f o r a l a r g u m e n t , w e

a f f i r m t h e s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t o n i t s w e l l

- r e a s o n e d o p i n i o n o f

1 6 A p r i l 2 0 0 8 ( 2 0 0 8 W L 1 7 7 5 4 0 9 ( S

. D

. F l a

. ) )

.
A F F I R M E D

.

2