alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1502.24 Petition to participate *in forma pauperis.* ( a ) A participant who believes that compliance with the filing and service requirements of this section constitutes an unreasonable financial burden may submit to the Commission a petition to participate *in forma pauperis.*
( b ) The petition will be captioned: “Request to Participate *In Forma Pauperis,* Docket No. ___.” Filing and service requirements for the petition are described in paragraph (c) of this section, whether or not the petition is granted; The petition must demonstrate that either: ( 1 ) The participant is indigent and a strong public interest justifies participation, or
( 2 ) The participant's participation is in the public interest because it can be considered of primary benefit to the general public.
( c ) The Commission may grant or deny the petition. If the petition is granted, the participant need file only one copy of each submission with the Office of the Secretary. The Office of the Secretary will make sufficient additional copies for the administrative record, and serve a copy on each other participant.
Exhibit 4.18





Exhibit 4.18




THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT dated for reference the 1st day of August, 2010 (the “Amendment”).


		
	
BETWEEN:

	
 


		
HELIX BIOPHARMA CORP., 

(the “Company”)


	 
	AND: 	 
	 	DONALD H. SEGAL, 
	 	(the “Executive”) 





		
	 	
WHEREAS:


	 
	
A.

	
the parties entered into an employment agreement dated for reference August 6, 2008, which was amended October 1st, 2009 (as so amended, the “Employment Agreement”);


	 
	
B.

	
the parties wish to amend the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement, upon the terms set out in this Amendment;


	 
	
THEREFORE in consideration of the recitals, the following covenants and the payment of one dollar made by each party to the other, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged by each party, the parties agree on the following terms: 


	 
	
1.

	
The amendments set out in this Amendment are effective on and after August 1, 2010.


		
	
2.

	
All other provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, except that where this Amendment may be in conflict with the provisions of the Employment Agreement, then this Amendment shall govern.


		
	
3.

	
Section 3.1 of the Employment Agreement is deleted and replaced with the following:


	 
	 	“3.1 Annual Base Salary 
	 
	 	
The Company shall pay or provide to the Executive, for his services under this Agreement, an annual salary of $415,000, payable semi-monthly on the fifteenth and the second last banking day of the month. Should the fifteenth day of any month not be a business day, the base salary otherwise due on such date shall be paid to the Executive on the immediately preceding business day.”


	 
	
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment as of the day and year first above written. 


	






HELIX BIOPHARMA CORP.

Per:

/s/ Gordon Lickrish

Authorized Signatory







/s/ Donald H. Segal

DONALD H. SEGAL
### §300d–11. Establishment of program

#### (a) Requirement of allotments for States

The Secretary shall for each fiscal year make an allotment for each State in an amount determined in accordance with section 300d–18 of this title. The Secretary shall make payments, as grants, each fiscal year to each State from the allotment for the State if the Secretary approves for the fiscal year involved an application submitted by the State pursuant to section 300d–17 of this title.

#### (b) Purpose

Except as provided in section 300d–33 1 of this title, the Secretary may not make payments under this part for a fiscal year unless the State involved agrees that, with respect to the trauma care component of the State plan for the provision of emergency medical services, the payments will be expended only for the purpose of developing, implementing, and monitoring the modifications to such component described in section 300d–13 of this title.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XII, §1211, as added Pub. L. 101–590, §3, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2919.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 300d–33 of this title, referred to in subsec. (b), was repealed by Pub. L. 103–183, title VI, §601(e), Dec. 14, 1993, 107 Stat. 2239.

1 See References in Text note below.
#### § 204.32 Change in agreements.

Neither the Lender nor any Assignee will consent to any change or waiver of any provision of any document contemplated by this Guaranty without the prior written consent of A.I.D.
#### § 1306.9 Administrative wage garnishment.

MCC hereby adopts the administrative wage garnishment rules issued by the Department of the Treasury at 31 CFR 285.11.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3969 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3969

    To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of Disperse Blue 77.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of Disperse Blue 77.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF DISPERSE BLUE 77.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Mixtures of         Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        Disperse Blue 77,                                                  31/2014.......
                        (9,10-
                        Anthracenedione,
                        1,8-dihydroxy-4-
                        nitro-5-
                        (phenylamino)-)
                        (CAS No. 20241-76-
                        3) and (3-
                        Pyridinecarbonitr
                        ile, 5-[2-(2-
                        cyano-4-
                        nitrophenyl)
                        diazenyl]-2-[[2-
                        (2-
                        hydroxyethoxy)eth
                        yl]amino]-4-
                        methyl-6-
                        (phenylamino)-)
                        (CAS No. 149988-
                        44-3) and (3-
                        Pyridinecarbonitr
                        ile, 5-[(2-cyano-
                        4-nitrophenyl)
                        diazenyl]-6-[[2-
                        (2-
                        hydroxyethoxy)eth
                        yl]amino]-4-
                        methyl-2-
                        (phenylamino)-)
                        (CAS No. 137428-
                        29-6) and (Acetic
                        acid, cyano-[3-
                        [(6-methoxy-2-
                        benzothiazoyl)
                        amino]-1H-
                        isoindol-1-
                        ylidene]-, pentyl
                        ester) (CAS No.
                        173285-74-0)
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        3204.11.35)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §§2930 to 2930f. Repealed. Pub. L. 97–35, title VI, §683(a), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 519

Section 2930, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §571, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2308; amended Pub. L. 96–88, title V, §509(b), Oct. 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 695, defined "Secretary", "State", and "financial assistance".

Section 2930a, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §572, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2308, related to applicable labor standards.

Section 2930b, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §573, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2309, related to comparability of wages.

Section 2930c, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §574, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2309, related to nondiscrimination requirements.

Section 2930d, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §575, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2309, related to unlawful demonstrations, rioting, or civil disturbances.

Section 2930e, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §576, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2309; amended Pub. L. 94–341, §2(a)(22), July 6, 1976, 90 Stat. 805, related to political activities.

Section 2930f, Pub. L. 88–452, title V, §577, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §8(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2310; amended Pub. L. 94–341, §2(a)(22), July 6, 1976, 90 Stat. 805, provided for advance funding.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 1981, see section 9912(a) of this title, prior to the general amendment of chapter 106 (§9901 et seq.) of this title by Pub. L. 105–285.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT EDWIN RECTOR, Trustee, EDWIN RECTOR, in his personal capacity; EDWIN RECTOR 1995 CHARITABLE REMAINDER TRUST, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. ALLEN D. WYKLE; STEPHEN R. KINNIER; APPROVED FEDERAL SAVINGS No. 00-1139 BANK; APPROVED FINANCIAL CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellees, and COOPERS & LYBRAND, L.L.P.; PRICE WATERHOUSE; PETER COODE; PATRICK M. BARBERICH; GRAY LAMBE, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-499-A) Submitted: July 20, 2000 Decided: September 14, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________COUNSELThomas H. Roberts, Tim Schulte, THOMAS H. ROBERTS & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants. Glen Michael Robertson, PAYNE, GATES, FARTHING & RADD, P.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Edwin Rector, individually and in his capacity as trustee for the Edwin Rector 1995 Charitable Remainder Trust ("Trust"), and the Trust appeal from the district court's order awarding four Defendants in this action attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $33,503.82.The attorney's fees constituted a sanction imposed pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 11. In setting the amount of the sanction, the district court referred not to case law interpreting Rule 11, but to case law addressing sanctions imposed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A.§ 1988(b) (West Supp. 2000). Factors governing the amount of sanctions awarded under Rule 11 are quite different from factors governing the amount of attorney's fees awarded under§ 1988. Compare In re Kunstler , 914 F.2d 505, 523-25 (4th Cir. 1990), with Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express , 488 F.2d 714, 717-19 (5th Cir. 1974). Because the incorrect standard was used, it is impossible to determine whether the district court abused its discretion in setting the amount of the sanction. We therefore vacate the judgment of the district court. The matter is remanded so that the district court may apply the proper standard in assessing the Rule 11 sanction. We dispense with oralargument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
2
# Journal officiel L 199/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0693 |
| --- | --- |
| Journal officiel
  de l'Union européenne | L 199 |
| | |
| Édition de langue française | Législation | 61e année7 août 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0693

Journal officiel

de l'Union européenne

L 199

Édition de langue française

Législation

61e année7 août 2018

---

| Sommaire | | II   Actes non législatifs | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | ACCORDS INTERNATIONAUX |
| | * | Information relative à l'entrée en vigueur de l'accord entre l'Union européenne et le Royaume de Norvège en ce qui concerne la coopération administrative, la lutte contre la fraude et le recouvrement de créances dans le domaine de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée | 1 |

Sommaire

II   Actes non législatifs

page

ACCORDS INTERNATIONAUX

*

Information relative à l'entrée en vigueur de l'accord entre l'Union européenne et le Royaume de Norvège en ce qui concerne la coopération administrative, la lutte contre la fraude et le recouvrement de créances dans le domaine de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée

1

| FR | Les actes dont les titres sont imprimés en caractères maigres sont des actes de gestion courante pris dans le cadre de la politique agricole et ayant généralement une durée de validité limitée.
  Les actes dont les titres sont imprimés en caractères gras et précédés d'un astérisque sont tous les autres actes. |
| --- | --- |

FR

Les actes dont les titres sont imprimés en caractères maigres sont des actes de gestion courante pris dans le cadre de la politique agricole et ayant généralement une durée de validité limitée.

Les actes dont les titres sont imprimés en caractères gras et précédés d'un astérisque sont tous les autres actes.

---

II Actes non législatifs

ACCORDS INTERNATIONAUX

| 7.8.2018 | FR | Journal officiel de l'Union européenne | L 199/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2018

FR

Journal officiel de l'Union européenne

L 199/1

---

Information relative à l'entrée en vigueur de l'accord entre l'Union européenne et le Royaume de Norvège en ce qui concerne la coopération administrative, la lutte contre la fraude et le recouvrement de créances dans le domaine de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée

L'Union européenne et le Royaume de Norvège se sont mutuellement notifié (le 9 juillet 2018 et le 26 juin 2018 respectivement) l'accomplissement de leurs procédures juridiques internes visées à l'article 44, paragraphe 1, de l'accord (1) signé le 6 février 2018.

1

L'accord entre en vigueur le 1er septembre 2018, conformément à son article 44, paragraphe 2.

er

---

(1)  Accord entre l'Union européenne et le Royaume de Norvège en ce qui concerne la coopération administrative, la lutte contre la fraude et le recouvrement de créances dans le domaine de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée (JO L 195 du 1.8.2018, p. 3.

1

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Conrado CANTU, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-40123

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 24, 2007.

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

Alberto Byron Pullen, International Bank of Commerce Building, Brownsville, TX, Jon Daniel Brooks, The Rangel Law Firm, Corpus Christi, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Conrado Cantu appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for racketeering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). Cantu argues that the district court erred in enhancing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for his obstructive behavior. He contends further that his waiver of his right to appeal his sentence is not enforceable in light of the Government’s breach of an oral plea agreement.

We first address Cantu’s breach argument, which we review de novo. *See United States v. Price,*95 F.3d 364, 367 (5th Cir.1996). Cantu has not carried his burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the Government breached the plea agreement. *United States v. Laday,*56 F.3d 24, 26 (5th Cir.1995). The terms of Cantu’s plea agreement were explicit and clear. The plea agreement did not obligate the Government to file a § 5K1.1 motion or to recommend any particular sentence. Despite Cantu’s self-serving allegations, there is nothing in the record to support his assertion that the Government made oral promises outside of the plea agreement and later breached those promises. *See United States v. Bal-lis,*28 F.3d 1399, 1410 (5th Cir.1994) (although circumstances surrounding the agreement’s negotiations might indicate the parties’ intent, “parol evidence is inadmissible to prove the meaning of an unambiguous plea agreement.”)

Cantu’s plea agreement contained an appeal waiver, which the Government seeks to enforce and which the record establishes was entered into knowingly and vol*302untarily. *See United States v. Robinson,*187 F.3d 516, 517 (5th Cir.1999). Therefore, Cantu’s appeal of the § 3C1.1 enhancement is barred by his waiver and is dismissed. *See United States v. Melan-con,*972 F.2d 566, 568 (5th Cir.1992).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

 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





Section 1350 Certification of Principal Executive Officer





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 INX Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Mark T. Hilz, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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, 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.






June 3, 2011
By:
/s/ MARK T. HILZMark T. HilzChief Executive Officer
#### Alison R. Minton et al., Appellants, v Stuart Minton, Jr., Respondent.

[717 NYS2d 519]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered October 15, 1999, which, in an action for, *inter alia,*defamation, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant’s motion to stay this action pending certain proceedings in Surrogate’s Court, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The stay was properly granted since the truth of the alleged defamatory statements at issue herein is likely to be decided in the earlier commenced Surrogate’s Court proceedings, in which one of the plaintiffs and defendant herein seek each other’s removal as coexecutor of an estate, and the other plaintiff herein is a beneficiary of the estate *(see, El Greco, Inc. v Cohn,*139 AD2d 615; *Goodridge v Fernandez,*121 AD2d 942, 944-945; *Schneider v Lazard Freres & Co.,*159 AD2d 291, 293-294). Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Margaret Zulkofske, Respondent, v Board of Zoning Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Muttontown, Appellant.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review appellant’s determination which, after a hearing, denied petitioner-respondent’s application for an area variance, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered September 27, 1976, which annulled the determination and remitted the matter to appellant for a new hearing and determination. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with Special Term’s conclusion that, upon remand, the board "should state how the creation of a lot of 1.6 acres will not be compatable *[sic]*with the surrounding neighborhood and adversely affect property values” and that it "should indicate the manner in which a 1.6 acre parcel would not be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the village’s land use plan.” However, it is noted that the condemnation award paid to petitioner apparently acknowledged the fact that she was left with a substandard lot and compensated her on the basis that her remaining property would be salable only to an adjoining owner. Accordingly, we believe it to be incumbent upon petitioner to show the amount, if any, which her adjoining neighbors (particularly the neighbor to her north, who also owns a substandard parcel) would be willing to pay for her land, as well as the cost to her to purchase all, or part, of the adjoining property. Only by means of such evidence would it be possible to ascertain whether petitioner has truly suffered any economic loss. Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Margett, JJ., concur.
### §§2821, 2822. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections were omitted in the general amendment of part C of this subchapter by Pub. L. 90–222, title I, §104, Dec. 23, 1967, 81 Stat. 703.

Section 2821, Pub. L. 88–452, title II, §219–1, formerly §219, Aug. 20, 1964, 78 Stat. 523; renumbered §219–1, Pub. L. 89–794, title IX, §901(b), Nov. 8, 1966, 80 Stat. 1475, set out the statement of purpose for the voluntary assistance program for needy children.

Section 2822, Pub. L. 88–452, title II, §220, Aug. 20, 1964, 78 Stat. 523; Pub. L. 89–253, §20, Oct. 9, 1965, 79 Stat. 976, provided for the establishment within the Office of Economic Opportunity of an information and coordinating center but prohibiting the interference with jurisdiction of State and local welfare agencies with respect to programs for needy children.
Exhibit 32.1

                                CERTIFICATIONS OF
                      CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND TREASURER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                    SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


            In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Capital
Beverage Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the "
Report"), I, Carmine N. Stella, hereby certify in my capacity as Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, 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 and belief:

            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.



Dated:  August 13, 2007                       By: /s/ Carmine Stella
                                                  -----------------------
                                            Name: Carmine N. Stella
                                           Title: Chief Executive Officer


            In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Capital
Beverage Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the "
Report"), I, Carol Russell, hereby certify in my capacity as Treasurer of the
Company, 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 and belief:

            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.



Dated:  August 13, 2007                       By: /s/ Carol Russell
                                                  --------------------
                                            Name: Carol Russell
                                           Title: Treasurer