alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.5

 

AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED SHAREHOLDERS AGREEMENT

 

THAT the Amended and Restated Shareholders Agreement be amended as follows:

 

by deleting the existing definition of “Registrable Securities” under Appendix A to the Shareholders Agreement in its entirety

 

““Registrable Securities” means (i) the Class A Ordinary Shares issued or issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Shares, (ii) any Class A Ordinary Shares of the Company issued as a dividend or other distribution with respect to, in exchange for, or in replacement of, the shares referenced in (i) herein, and (iii) any Class A Ordinary Shares owned or hereafter acquired by the Preferred Shareholders prior to the consummation of an IPO; excluding in all cases, however, any of the foregoing sold by a Person in a transaction other than an assignment pursuant to  Section 11.3. For purposes of this Agreement, Registrable Securities shall cease to be Registrable Securities when such Registrable Securities have been disposed of pursuant to an effective Registration Statement.”

 

And substituting therefor the following new definition:

 

““Registrable Securities” means (i) the Class A Ordinary Shares issued or issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Shares, (ii) any Class A Ordinary Shares of the Company issued as a dividend or other distribution with respect to, in exchange for, or in replacement of, the shares referenced in (i) herein, and (iii) any Class A Ordinary Shares owned or hereafter acquired by the Preferred Shareholders prior to or concurrently with the consummation of an IPO; excluding in all cases, however, any of the foregoing sold by a Person in a transaction other than an assignment pursuant to Section 11.3. For purposes of this Agreement, Registrable Securities shall cease to be Registrable Securities when such Registrable Securities have been disposed of pursuant to an effective Registration Statement.”

 

[Amendment to Amended and Restated Shareholders Agreement]
I always knew that guy was off. He 

complained a lot. His schedule was 

odd. He came in at odd hours. And he 

asked a lot of questions... maybe too 

many questions. He just wasn’t like 

the rest of us, just trying to do our 

jobs. But there wasn’t really that “one 

thing” that really tipped me off that he 

was doing something wrong, and it 

wasn’t my place to say anything. It’s 

like a code. We’re a team. You don’t 

rat our your team. I never thought 

anything like this could happen here. 

We’re FDIC. We don’t have access to 

anything that could hurt someone, do 

we?













https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY-CSX4NPtg






























https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZXYEdWPBYA
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/internationaltravel/before-you-go/step.html/
##### 



Exhibit 15.1 Awareness Letter of Independent Accountants May 6, 2005 Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20549 Commissioners: We are aware that our report dated May 6, 2005 on our review of interim financial information of
Amegy Bancorporation, Inc. for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and included
in the Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 is incorporated
by reference in its Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-76269, 333-21619, 333-55685,
333-33533, 333-27891, 333-60190, 333-74452, 333-87630, 333-36092, 333-120196, and 333-120197). Very truly yours, /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2798 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2798

   To revive the suspension of duty on 3,5,6-trichlorosalicylic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 29, 1993

  Mr. Shays introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To revive the suspension of duty on 3,5,6-trichlorosalicylic acid.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF EXISTING SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    Heading 9902.29.90 (relating to 3,5,6-trichlorosalicylic acid) of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by 
striking out ``12/31/92'' and inserting ``12/31/95''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by section 1 applies with 
respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, 
on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Retroactive Application to Termination of Previous 
Suspension.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon proper request filed 
with the appropriate customs officer before the 90th day after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal from warehouse 
for consumption, of any good provided for under heading 9902.29.90 of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States shall, if such 
entry or withdrawal was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992; and
            (2) before the 15th day after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act;
be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or withdrawal 
occurred on such 15th day.

                                 <all>
```
#### NGHI XUAN TRAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-75383.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007 *

Filed Feb. 26, 2007.

Michael T. Purcell, Esq., Portland, OR, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Portland, OR, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Esq., Song Park, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Nghi Xuan Tran, a native and citizen of Vietnam, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. We review the denial of motions to reopen for abuse of discretion and we review due process claims de novo. *See Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We grant in part, and deny in part, the petition for review.

*682The BIA erred by denying as untimely Tran’s special motion to seek relief under former section § 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h) (establishing an April 26, 2005 deadline for such motions). The BIA’s failure to address the motion to reopen as a special motion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 was an abuse of discretion and we remand for further proceedings. *See Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by concluding that Tran had not established ineffective assistance of counsel. *See Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 899-900 (9th Cir.2003) (no claim for ineffective assistance where an alien was unable to demonstrate both a deprivation of due process and resulting prejudice). Nothing in the record demonstrates that Tran was actually deprived of due process. *See Lopez v. INS,*775 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1985) (ineffective assistance of counsel is a denial of due process “if the proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from reasonably presenting his case”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 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. Ensermo GUERRERO-ALMANZAR, true name Anselmo Guerrero-Almanza, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-40780

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 7, 2007.

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, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ensermo Guerrero-Almanzar raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pablo CARDENAS-SANCHEZ, also known as Florentino Cardenas-Sanchez, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-20758

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 7, 2007.

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, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pablo Cardenas-Sanchez raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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 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 hhgregg, Inc. (the Company) Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jerry W. Throgmartin, Chairman and 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, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1). | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2). | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ Jerry W. ThrogmartinJerry W. Throgmartin Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer


Dated: June 2, 2009

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                   ERESEARCHTECHNOLOGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                            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 eResearchTechnology, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael J. McKelvey, President and 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, to my knowledge, that:

     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: November 9, 2006                   /s/ Michael J. McKelvey
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Michael J. McKelvey,
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer

This certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed "filed" by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Exhibit 32.2

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 Novastar Financial, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gregory S. Metz, Chief Financial 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |  |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 10, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Gregory S. Metz    
|                   |  |  |  | Gregory S. Metz        
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard
contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 01-4406

ANDRE HART,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston.

Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge.

(CR-00-264)

Submitted: November 28, 2001

Decided: December 28, 2001

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Christopher L. Murphy, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant.

Lee Ellis Berlinsky, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Andre Hart appeals his 262-month sentence imposed following his

guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to distribute less

than five grams of crack cocaine and three counts of distribution of

less than five grams of crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.A.

§ 841 (West 1999 & Supp. 2001). Hart’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), stating that

there were no meritorious issues for appeal, but raising the issue of

whether the plea complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. Hart filed a pro

se brief arguing that his sentence was improperly calculated based on

the drug quantity attributed to him, dangerous weapon enhancement,

and his leadership role in the crime. Because our review of the record

discloses no reversible error, we affirm Hart’s conviction and sentence. Specifically, we find that Hart’s guilty plea was knowingly and

voluntarily entered after a thorough hearing pursuant to Rule 11.

Regarding Hart’s claim that he was improperly sentenced, we have

considered Hart’s sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines and find no error. 

As required by Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and

have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm

Hart’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel

inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court

of the United States for further review. If the client 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 the client. Accordingly, Hart’s motion to substitute

counsel is denied. 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

2 UNITED STATES v. HART
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K








CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): November 6, 2017





PDC Energy, Inc.


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)








Delaware001-3741995-2636730(State or other jurisdiction of(Commission(I.R.S. Employerincorporation or organization)File Number)Identification Number)





1775 Sherman Street, Suite 3000


Denver, Colorado 80203


(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)





Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: ( 303) 860-5800








Not Applicable


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)








Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:


 ̈ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)


 ̈ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)


 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))


 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))











---













Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition.





The following information is furnished pursuant to Item 2.02.





On November 6, 2017 , PDC Energy, Inc. issued a press release announcing its operating and financial results for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2017.  A copy of the press release is furnished as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated by reference herein.





The information in this Current Report on Form 8-K, including the exhibit hereto, is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.





Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.





(d) Exhibits


Exhibit No.Description99.1Press Release dated November 6, 2017, announcing results for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2017.














---










SIGNATURE


Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





Date: November 6, 2017


PDC ENERGY, INC.By:/s/ Daniel W. AmidonDaniel W. AmidonSenior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary











---










EXHIBIT INDEX


Exhibit No.Description99.1Press Release dated November 6, 2017, announcing results for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2017.
**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

 

I, Charles P. Theuer, M.D., PhD., President and Chief Executive Officer of TRACON Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based upon my knowledge:

 

(1)   this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and 

 

(2)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. 

 
| Date:   March 10, 2015 | /s/   Charles P. Theuer, M.D., Ph.D. |
|-----------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                        | Charles   P. Theuer, M.D., Ph.D      |
|                        | President   and Chief Executive Officer   |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----