alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3

Letter Agreement Dated December 20, 2002
By and Between William F. Pass and
U.S. Gold Corporation

This letter agreement (the "Agreement") is made
between William F. Pass, Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and Secretary (the "Option
Holder") and U.S. Gold Corporation (the
"Corporation").

WHEREAS, effective August 20, 2002, Option Holder
was granted an Incentive Stock Option Agreement
under the Corporation's 2002 Stock Option and Stock
Grant Plan (the "Plan") covering options to
purchase 375,000 shares of Common Stock of the
Corporation at an exercise price of $0.32/share and
expiring August 20, 2012 (the "SOA"), which SOA
was not able to be exercised until and unless the
Plan as well as the SOA were approved by
shareholders of the Corporation, and

WHEREAS, the shareholders of the Corporation have
not to date approved either the Plan nor the SOA,
and

WHEREAS, the Option Holder has voluntarily agreed
to terminate the SOA effective immediately and for
no consideration, and

WHEREAS, the Corporation accepts the voluntary
officer of the Option Holder and is agreeable to
the termination of the SOA immediately, now

THEREFORE, the Option Holder and the Corporation
agree to the termination effective immediately of
that certain Incentive Stock Option Agreement dated
August 20, 2002 with Option Holder covering an
aggregate of 375,000 shares of Common Stock of the
Corporation at an exercise price of $0.32/share.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have
executed this letter agreement effective as of
December 20, 2002.

Option Holder:

/S/ William F. Pass
William F. Pass


Corporation

/S/ William W. Reid
William W. Reid
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
[LOGO]
                                    NuTech
                                     Digital, Inc

                                September 7, 2004

Mr. Joseph Giarmo
c/o NuTech Digital, Inc.
7900 Gloria Avneue
Van Nuys, California 91406

Dear Joe:

      On September 1, 2004, the Board of Directors of NuTech Digital, Inc. (the
"Company") approved a grant to you of an incentive stock option covering
1,000,000 shares of restricted common stock as a bonus to you for your
exceptional performance and as an incentive for you to continue rendering
valuable services to the Company. The market value of the Company's common stock
on September 1, 2004 was $0.26. This option is intended to be an incentive
option in accordance with section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code. The term of
the option will be ten years, to August 31, 2014, after which time it will not
be exercisable. The Company will seek shareholder approval of the option at its
next annual meeting of shareholders. The Company will register the option on an
S-8 Registration Statement. You may not transfer this option other than by Will
or the laws of descent and distribution. During your lifetime, this option will
be exercisable only by you. The option will be exercisable by you immediately as
to all 1,000,000 shares:

      Please acknowledge your receipt of this option agreement by countersigning
it at the space indicated below.

                                       Very truly yours,

                                       NuTECH DIGITAL, INC.

                                       By:
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Lee Kasper, President

<PAGE>

Mr. Joseph Giarmo
September 7, 2004
Page 2

September 7, 2004

      I acknowledge the terms of the above letter and agree to be bound by them.


                                       Joseph Giarmo
(No. 37249.

#### *In re*Carl H. Stowe, Attorney, Respondent.

*Opinion filed February 1, 1963.*

Richard B. Allen, of Springfield, *amicus curiae.*

Carl H. Stowe, of Greenville, *pro se.*

Mr. Justice Schaefer

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a disciplinary proceeding. The Committee on Grievances and the Board of Governors of the Illinois State Bar Association, as commissioners of this court under Rule 59, have found that ten charges of misconduct against the respondent, Carl H. Stowe, who was State’s Attorney of Bond County, were proved by clear and convincing evidence. Five of the charges involved conversion of the funds of his clients; three involved the conversion of moneys that had been paid as fines to the county clerk and to justices of the peace in Bond County, and two involved matters with respect to which he had been consulted as State’s Attorney but which he had treated as private collection items.

It is unnecessary to set out the evidence as to these charges because the respondent’s position is that “no exceptions are taken as to any findings of fact. The facts are stipulated. The respondent can only beg to disagree as to *48any recommendation of disbarment or suspension of his license.”

While the respondent has admitted the extremely serious misconduct with which he is charged, it is his position that disbarment or suspension is inappropriate because of his full disclosure of the matters involved and because he is now rehabilitated. There is no proof of rehabilitation. The' bizarre pattern of grossly unethical and dishonest conduct that this record discloses makes inappropriate any form of discipline other than disbarment. As we said in *In re Clark,*8 Ill.2d 314, 321: “We cannot permit this respondent to continue the practice of law, and thus invite the public to retain the purported services of one to whom the common obligations of his profession mean so little.”

The recommendation of the Commissioners is approved, and the name of the respondent is stricken from the roll of attorneys.

*Respondent disbarred.*
#### § 125.22 Designation of cartman or lighterman, or other bonded carrier.

Importers and exporters shall designate on the entry and permit of bonded merchandise the bonded cartman, lighterman, or other bonded carrier as provided in § 112.2 of this chapter by whom they wish their merchandise to be conveyed. An importer also may designate a foreign trade zone operator, bonded warehouse proprietor, container station operator or centralized examination station operator under the conditions specified in § 112.2 of this chapter for limited cartage; if he does so, the importer must also designate that the merchandise is bound for the facility run by the operator he designates. Approval of a designation shall be indicated on the entry papers by the initials of the appropriate Customs officer placed in close proximity to the designation.

[T.D. 94-81, 59 FR 51495, Oct. 12, 1994]
#### Stephen Bara, Respondent, v. Louis Yager, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ. [See *post,*p. 1045.]
|  |
|--|

|  |  |
|--|--|

| ** ** |
|------------|

|   | ****Frederick Duquesne - Interesting Case Write-Up**** 
 

**Part 1******
Introduction
Reading Room Index - A   B   C   D   E    F   G- H   I    J    K   L   M   N   -O   P   Q   R   S   T   U-V   W   X   Y   Z   
Electronic Reading Room
- Alphabetical Listing- Espionage-Famous Persons-Gangster Era- Historical Interest- Unusual Phenomena-Violent CrimeFBI              File Fact Sheet FOIA Request Instructions- FOIA Request Form - Privacy Waiver and Certificate of Identity Form Privacy Act Instructions- Privacy Act Request FormDOJ              Reference GuideU.S.              DOJ FOIASearch
All of these publications are in PDF (Portable Document Format). To view them you will need to have the Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in installed on your computer. The Reader can be downloaded at no cost from Adobe's site on the World Wide Web.   If you have difficulty accessing any material on this site because of a disability, please contact us in writing or via telephone and we will work with you to make the information available.

Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Section    202-324-5520 |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
### §1387. Semiannual report of disbursements

#### (a) Reports required

Not later than 60 days after the last day of each semiannual period of a fiscal year, the Executive Director of the Office of Compliance 1 shall submit to the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate, and the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate, with respect to that period, a detailed, itemized report of the disbursements for the operations of the Office of Compliance.1

#### (b) Contents

#### (1) In general

The report required by subsection (a) shall include—

(A) the identification of each person who receives a payment from the Office of Compliance,1 except that in the case of an individual, the identification shall be provided in a manner that does not identify the individual by name;

(B) the quantity and price of any item furnished to the Office of Compliance; 1

(C) a description of any service rendered to the Office of Compliance,1 together with a statement of the time required for the service, and the name, title, and amount paid to each person who renders the service;

(D) a statement of all amounts appropriated to, or received or expended by, the Office of Compliance 1 and any unexpended balances of such amounts; and

(E) such additional information as may be required by regulation of the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate, or the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives or Senate.

#### (2) Exception for confidential information

The Executive Director of the Office of Compliance 1 may exclude from any report required by subsection (a) any information the disclosure of which would violate confidentiality policies of the Office of Compliance.1

#### (c) Effective date

This section shall apply with respect to the semiannual periods of October 1 through March 31 and April 1 through September 30 of each fiscal year, beginning with fiscal year 2014.

(Pub. L. 113–76, div. I, title I, §1102, Jan. 17, 2014, 128 Stat. 425.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2014, and also as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, and not as part of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 which comprises this chapter.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

Office of Compliance changed, as of Dec. 21, 2018, and considered to refer and apply, to the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, see section 308(d) of Pub. L. 115–397, set out as an Effective Date of 2018 Amendment note under section 1381 of this title.

1 See Change of Name note below.
EXHIBIT 32.2: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

      In connection with the accompanying Quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Magna-Lab, Inc. for the quarter ended May 31, 2009, the undersigned hereby
certifies 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-Q for the quarter ended May 31,
            2009 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-Q for
            the quarter ended May 31, 2009 fairly presents, in all material
            respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
            Magna-Lab, Inc.


July 10, 2009         /s/ Kenneth C. Riscica
                      ----------------------
                      Name: Kenneth C. Riscica
                      Title: Treasurer & Secretary (principal financial officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS OF AND FOR THE
SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,215
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,815
<ALLOWANCES>                                       361
<INVENTORY>                                      2,580
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,724
<PP&E>                                           6,613
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,730
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,938
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,448
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            86
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,131
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,938
<SALES>                                         20,467
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,467
<CGS>                                            7,595
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,595
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,738
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 172
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (592)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (592)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (592)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
#### § 123.13 Foreign repairs to domestic locomotives and other domestic railroad equipment.

A report of the first arrival in the United States of a domestic locomotive or other railroad equipment after repairs have been made in a foreign country other than those required to restore it to the condition in which it last left the United States (“running repairs”), shall be made promptly, in writing, to the Customs officer at the port of re-entry. The report shall state the time and place of arrival, and the nature and value of the repairs. Each such locomotive or other piece of railroad equipment when withdrawn from international traffic shall be subject to duty upon the value of the repairs (other than “running repairs”), made abroad at the rate at which the repaired article would be dutiable if imported. For the appropriate determination as to whether the locomotive or other railroad equipment should be considered “domestic” or “foreign”, see § 123.12(d).

[T.D. 73-73, 38 FR 6991, Mar. 15, 1973]
AVAQMD Rule 403 C-3

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 

1 

2 
C-4 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010
AVAQMD Rule 403 C-5

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 

District response to comment letter 1 

1. Demolition Activities was placed under a new subsection. See Section (C)(6). 

2. The new subsections in proposed rule were taken from SJVAPCD Rule 8031. The 

District was required to evaluate the provisions of this rule and incorporate the provisions 

as determined to be cost effective pursuant to H&S Code §39614(d). The District 

determined these measures to be cost effective and have kept provisions from SJVAPCD 

Rule 8031. 
C-6 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 403 

C-7

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 
C-8 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 
AVAQMD Rule 403 C-9

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 

District response to comment letter 2 

1. A definition was added for track-out derived from SCAQMD Rule 403 section (c)(32). 

2. Clarification added as recommended in comment. 

3. Rule citation was corrected as noted. 

4. Clarification added as recommended in comment. 

5. Rule citation was corrected as noted. 
C-10 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 403 C-11

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 

1 

3 

2 
C-12 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 403 C-13

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010 

District response to comment letter 3 

1. Yes, this section does require applying water or stabilizers/suppressants if wind barriers 

do not limit VDE to 20 percent opacity. 

2. The intent of the Rule is to require a Dust Control Plan if Bulk Material handling occurs 

for three or more days regardless of the time frame. 

3. The intent of this section is to exempt unpaved roads that are within 25 feet of the 

property line as the requirements of sections (C)(1)(a) and (C)(2)(b) could not be met 

with and unpaved road in close proximity to the property line. 
C-14 AVAQMD Rule 403 

Final Staff Report, 5/5/2010

This page intentionally left blank.
§ 122.141 Definitions. Under subpart N, the following definitions apply: ( a ) *United States.* The term “U.S.” includes the several States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
( b ) *Foreign area.* The term “foreign area” means any area other than the several States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 97-104 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, July 9, 1997)

INSPECTION RESPONSIBILITY FOR REGION IV NON-POWER REACTORS

SHIFTED TO NRC HEADQUARTERS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has transferred inspection responsibility for all 18

non-power reactors located in its Region IV area to NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.

Non-power reactors are small reactors used for purposes other than generating commercial

electricity such as research, teaching or producing medically useful isotopes.

Region IV, based in Arlington, Texas, encompasses 21 states--all states west of the

Mississippi River except Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri. The change is being made to improve

efficiency. All other regulatory activities for non-power reactors are overseen at headquarters,

and non-power reactor inspections constitute a small percentage of Region IV activities.

Inspections of non-power reactors are conducted at intervals of one to three years, and

generally require one or two inspectors for one week.

Non-power reactors in Region IV are at the following locations:

1. Aerotest, San Ramon, Calif.

2. General Atomics, San Diego, Calif.

3. General Electric, Pleasanton, Calif.

4. Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho

5. Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas

6. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

7. Reed College, Portland, Oregon

8. Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, (2 reactors)

9. University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona

10. University of California, Irvine, Calif.

11. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico

12. University of Texas, Austin, Texas

13. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah

14. University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. (Shutdown awaiting

(decommissioning)

15. Washington State University, Pullman, Wash.

16. U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo.

17. Veterans Administration Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska

###
#### Norris Morey and Others, Respondents, v. Caspar Schuster and Others, Appellants, Impleaded with Eugene V. Chamberlain.

Motion of defendant Chamberlain for modification of order of reversal entered December 23, 1913, so as to provide that he be excepted from the operation thereof and in no manner affected thereby denied, without costs, upon the ground that the record on appeal does not show that the defendant Chamberlain was entitled to be heard thereon in this court. If notice of motion for *938judgment on the pleadings made at Special Term should have been given to him, it does not appear that his rights have been prejudiced or in any way affected by the result of that application.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-1796

_____________________________

LLOYD D. SHANNON JR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

John Jay Gontarek, Judge.

September 18, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

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

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Lloyd D. Shannon Jr, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.