alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.111**AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE NOTE**               This Amendment to the Convertible Note (the “Note”), dated as of May 31, 2006 executed bySedona Corporation (the “Maker”) payable to the order of Charles F. Mitchell (the “Holder”),in the principal amount of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND and no/100 dollars ($300,000.00), is enteredinto as of March 6, 2008.  **Whereas,** the Note was originally due to mature on May 31, 2008(the “Maturity Date”); and   **Whereas,**Maker has made no payments under the Note to date; and   **Whereas,**Maker and the Holder desire to further extend the Maturity Date;   **Now Therefore,**for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency ofwhich is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to amend the Note as follows: 1. The Maturity Date of the Note shall be further extended until October23, 2009.  2. To effectuate the foregoing:    Section 1 (d) of the Note shall be replaced in its entirety by the following:* ** **“The term**“Maturity**” shall mean the date on which this shall be due and payable infull, which date shall be October 23, 2009.*   Section 2 of the Note shall be replaced in its entirety by the following:        *“**Payment Terms**. This Loan shall be effective commencing on theeffective date and continuing until Maturity. The Maker shall be obligated to makeone payment of all outstanding principal and interest due thereon at Maturity.Unless otherwise designated in writing, mailed or delivered to Maker, the place forpayment of the indebtedness evidenced by this Note shall be the Holder’s principaladdress as noted above. Payments received on this Note shall be applied first toaccrued interest, and the balance to principal.”* 3. Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribedto them in the Note.
 

 
 4. Except as amended by this Amendment, the Note shall remain in full force and effect,enforceable in accordance with its terms and Maker hereby reaffirms and acknowledgesall of its obligations thereunder.          **IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first writtenabove.               Charles F. Mitchell         Sedona Corporation        By:  Marco Emrich, President 
-2-
EQUIVA
                                               TRADING COMPANY

August 9, 2002

DEREK RESOURCES CORP
WIRE PAYMENT
335 BURRARD ST STE 1730
VANCOUVER BC CANADA V6C2G8, 1-0

Dear Sir or Madam:

Re: Change In Posted Price

You  were  recently  sent  a Contract Assignment  from  Equiva
Trading  Company (ETCO) to Shell Trading (US) Company (STUSCO)
effective September 1, 2002. August 31, 2002 will be the  last
day  Equiva  Trading  Company will post  for  crude  oil,  and
effective September 1, 2002, STUSCO will commence posting  for
crude oil.

Accordingly, we would appreciate your acknowledgement  of  the
change   of  posted  prices  on  crude  contracts  (listing[s]
enclosed)  from  ETCO to Shell Trading (US) Company  effective
September 1, 2002.

We  would  appreciate receiving your response by  returning  a
signed copy of this letter, either by mail or fax to (713) 246-
8674  within ten days from the date of this letter. If  we  do
not receive your response within ten days, we will assume your
consent to the change of posted prices.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,


/s/ Matt McComiskey
    ---------------
    Matt McComiskey
    Vice President


Attachments

     Crude Contract Numbers:             98679R01

     This will acknowledge the change of posted prices on our
contracts that were assigned from Equiva Trading Company to
Shell Trading (US) Company:


     By:       /s/ Frank Hallam

     Title:        CFO

     Date:         August 29/02
<PAGE>


                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.2

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                            TO THE DWYER GROUP, INC.
                             1997 STOCK OPTION PLAN


         Pursuant to Section 17 of The Dwyer Group, Inc. 1997 Stock Option Plan
(the "Plan"), Section 5 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as
follows:
                  5. SHARES SUBJECT TO PLAN. Options may not be granted pursuant
         to the terms of the Plan for more than 850,000 shares of Common Stock
         of the Company (including any and all options outstanding under the
         Company's 1986 Option Plan), but this number shall be adjusted to
         reflect, if deemed appropriate by the Committee, any stock dividend,
         stock split, share combination, recapitalization or the like, of or by
         the Company. Shares to be optioned and sold may be made available from
         either authorized but unissued Common Stock or Common Stock held by the
         Company in its treasury. Shares that by reason of the expiration of an
         option or otherwise are no longer subject to purchase pursuant to an
         option granted under the Plan may be re-offered under the Plan.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Amendment
effective as of the 22nd day of June, 2001.


                                     THE DWYER GROUP, INC.



                                     By: /s/ Thomas J. Buckley
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                          Thomas J. Buckley, Vice President and
                                          Chief Financial Officer
### §4825. Effect on other acts

#### (a) In general

Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to modify, repeal, supersede, or otherwise affect the provisions of any other laws authorizing control over the export or reexport of any item.

#### (b) Coordination of controls

#### (1) In general

The authority granted to the President under this subchapter shall be exercised in such manner so as to achieve effective coordination with the authority exercised under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) and all other export control and sanctions authorities exercised by Federal departments and agencies, particularly the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Energy.

#### (2) Sense of Congress

It is the sense of Congress that in order to achieve effective coordination described in paragraph (1), such Federal departments and agencies—

(A) should continuously work to create enforceable regulations with respect to the export, reexport, and in-country transfer by United States and foreign persons of commodities, software, technology, and services to various end uses and end users for foreign policy and national security reasons;

(B) should regularly work to reduce complexity in the system, including complexity caused merely by the existence of structural, definitional, and other non-policy based differences between and among different export control and sanctions systems; and

(C) should coordinate controls on items exported, reexported, or in-country transferred in connection with a foreign military sale under chapter 2 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2761 et seq.) or a commercial sale under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act [22 U.S.C. 2778] to reduce as much unnecessary administrative burden as possible that is a result of differences between the exercise of those two authorities.

#### (c) Nonproliferation controls

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to supersede the procedures published by the President pursuant to section 2139a(c) of title 42.

(Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVII, §1767, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2233.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this part", meaning part I (§§1751–1768) of subtitle B of title XVII of div. A of Pub. L. 115–232, known as the Export Controls Act of 2018, which is classified principally to this subchapter. For complete classification of part I to the Code, see section 1751 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a Short Title note under section 4801 of this title and Tables.

The Arms Export Control Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(2)(C), is Pub. L. 90–629, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1320. Chapter 2 of the Act is classified generally to subchapter II (§2761 et seq.) of chapter 39 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2751 of Title 22 and Tables.
Editorial Note on Part 773
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54938, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 773 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93323-93325, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 773.27 Burden of proof for ownership or control challenges. This section applies to you if you challenge an ownership or control listing or finding. ( a ) When you challenge a listing of ownership or control, or a finding of ownership or control made under § 774.11(g) of this subchapter, you must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that you either— ( 1 ) Do not own or control the entire surface coal mining operation or relevant portion or aspect thereof; or
( 2 ) Did not own or control the entire surface coal mining operation or relevant portion or aspect thereof during the relevant time period.
( b ) In meeting your burden of proof, you must present reliable, credible, and substantial evidence and any explanatory materials to the regulatory authority. The materials presented in connection with your challenge will become part of the permit file, an investigation file, or another public file. If you request, we will hold as confidential any information you submit under this paragraph which is not required to be made available to the public under § 842.16 of this chapter (when OSM is the regulatory authority) or under § 840.14 of this chapter (when a State is the regulatory authority).
( c ) Materials you may submit in response to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section include, but are not limited to— ( 1 ) Notarized affidavits containing specific facts concerning the duties that you performed for the relevant operation, the beginning and ending dates of your ownership or control of the operation, and the nature and details of any transaction creating or severing your ownership or control of the operation.
( 2 ) Certified copies of corporate minutes, stock ledgers, contracts, purchase and sale agreements, leases, correspondence, or other relevant company records.
( 3 ) Certified copies of documents filed with or issued by any State, municipal, or Federal governmental agency.
( 4 ) An opinion of counsel, when supported by— ( i ) Evidentiary materials;
( ii ) A statement by counsel that he or she is qualified to render the opinion; and
( iii ) A statement that counsel has personally and diligently investigated the facts of the matter.
[65 FR 79666, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 72 FR 68030, Dec. 3, 2007]
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 109 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Social Security 

should be preserved and protected for current beneficiaries, and for 

future generations to come. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2023 

Ms. TENNEY (for herself, Mr. CISCOMANI, Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania, Mr. 

WITTMAN, Ms. SALAZAR, Mr. CAREY, Ms. MALLIOTAKIS, Mr. KEAN of 

New Jersey, Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana, Mr. LALOTA, and Mr. 

SMUCKER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

Social Security should be preserved and protected for 

current beneficiaries, and for future generations to come. 

Whereas Social Security provides essential income security 

through retirement, disability, and survivor benefits for 

over 66,000,000 Americans of all ages; 

Whereas Social Security is essential to the dignity and security of the Nation’s elderly, disabled, and their families; 

Whereas each payday, American workers send their hardearned payroll taxes to Social Security and in return are 

promised income security for themselves and their famiVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Feb 09, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR109.IH HR109

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 109 IH 

lies upon retirement, disability, or death, and that commitment must be kept; 

Whereas the policies of the Biden Administration have resulted in record inflation, rising prices, and putting severe strain on Americans, in particular those on Social 

Security; and 

Whereas workers’ ability to save and invest for their own retirement will continue to be particularly important, especially for younger workers, to enhance their own retirement security: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that Social Security should be preserved and 

3 protected for current beneficiaries, and for future genera4 tions to come. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
§ 148.10 General. ( a ) Redundant, overlapping, and duplicative policies and practices that govern the co-use of facilities for classified purposes have resulted in excessive protection and unnecessary expenditure of funds. Lack of reciprocity has also impeded achievement of national security objectives and adversely affected economic and technological interest.
( b ) Interagency reciprocal acceptance of security policies and procedures for approving, accrediting, and maintaining the secure posture of shared facilities will reduce the aggregate costs, promote interoperability of agency security systems, preserve the vitality of the U.S. industrial base, and advance national security objectives.
( c ) Agency heads, or their designee, are encouraged to periodically issue written affirmations in support of the policies and procedures prescribed herein and in the Security Policy Board (SPB) policy, entitled “Reciprocity of Use and Inspections of Facilities.”
( d ) The policies and procedures prescribed herein shall be applicable to all agencies. This document does not supersede the authority of the Secretary of Defense under Executive Order 12829 (58 FR 3479, 3 CFR 1993 Comp., p. 570); the Secretary of Energy or the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Secretary of State under the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Anti-Terrorism Act of 1986; the Secretaries of the military departments and military department installation Commanders under the Internal Security Act of 1950; the Director of Central Intelligence under the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, or Executive Order 12333; the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office under Executive Order 12829 or Executive Order 12958 (60 FR 19825, 3 CFR 1995 Comp., p. 333); or substantially similar authority instruments assigned to any other agency head.
#### W. H. Seitzler, appellee, v. James B. Cook and Martin Matheson, trading as Cook & Matheson, appellants.

Gen. No. 29,579.

Action to recover commission on sale of real estate. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John R. Newcomer, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 13, 1925.

Loueks, Eckert & Peterson, for appellants.

M. D. Dolan, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
FREMONT

CARBON

SWEETWATER

ALBANY

NATRONA

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

CONVERSE

CROOK

UINTA

LARAMIE

WESTON

PLATTE

GOSHEN

NIOBRARA

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

Bridger-Teton

Thunder 

Basin

Medicine-Bow

Medicine-Bow

Rawlins

Casper

Rock Springs

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Yellowstone Newcastle

National Park

Lusk

Yoder

Hanna

Baggs

Afton

Hulett

Glendo

Casper

Douglas

Bairoil

Rawlins

Laramie

Superior

Sundance

Saratoga

La Barge Guernsey

Pinedale

Kemmerer

Evanston

Cheyenne

Wheatland

Wamsutter

Cokeville

Chugwater

Big Piney

Newcastle

Torrington

Rock River

Pine Bluffs

Green River

Medicine Bow

Fort Laramie

Elk Mountain

Rock Springs

Grand Encampment

0 25 50 100

Miles

0 25 50 100

Kilometers

Wyoming Sage-Grouse 

Land Use Plan Amendments

o

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF 

THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

LUP Amendments Planning Area

Sage-grouse Priority/Core Habitat Areas

BLM Field Office Boundary

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundary

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

FSIM Fire Probability Categories

Zero

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Map 3-32: FSIM Fire 

Probability Categories
Document

Exhibit 10.25
Executive Compensation Notification
Chief Financial Officer




Fiscal 2023 Compensation Program of Chief Financial Officer


Fiscal 2023 Base Salary and Other Compensation: The table below sets forth the fiscal 2023 base salary and bonus for Mr. Wheat.
																					
					Annual Base Salary		Discretionary Bonus
	Name 		Office 		Fiscal 2023		Fiscal 2023
	Bill W. Wheat		Executive Vice President and CFO
		$500,000		See Below




Discretionary Bonus and Other Long-Term Benefits:  The Board of Directors may award discretionary bonuses to Mr. Wheat based on his performance in fiscal 2023. In addition, Mr. Wheat may participate in two separate deferred compensation plans. The first plan allows the executive to make voluntary income deferrals. The second plan is a promise by the Company to pay benefits to the executive. If the executive is employed by the Company on the last day of the fiscal year (for example September 30, 2023), then the Company will establish a liability equal to 10% of his annual base salary as of the first day of the fiscal year (for example October 1, 2022). This liability will accrue earnings in future years at a rate established by the administrative committee.


Performance Restricted Stock Units: On November 1, 2022, the Compensation Committee approved an award of performance restricted stock units (“Performance RSUs”) pursuant to the Company's 2006 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended and restated ("2006 Plan"), to Mr. Wheat in the following amount:															
	Name 		Office 		Target Number of Performance
Restricted Stock Units
	Bill W. Wheat		Executive Vice President and CFO
		50,000




The Performance RSUs relate to a three-year performance period beginning on October 1, 2022 and ending on September 30, 2025 (the “2025 Performance Period”). The Performance RSUs will vest if four performance goals are satisfied. The four performance goals are relative total shareholder return (“TSR”), relative return on investment (“ROI”), relative selling, general and administrative expense containment (“SG&A”) and relative gross profit (“GP”) (collectively, the “Performance Goals”). Each Performance Goal is weighted twenty-five percent (25%) of the target number of Performance RSUs. The target number of Performance RSUs may be increased to a maximum number of 100,000 for Mr. Wheat upon maximum achievement of each of the four Performance Goals and decreased to a minimum number of zero upon minimum achievement of each of the four Performance Goals based on relative performance to the Company's peer group or the S&P 500 Index TSR, as applicable.
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 Constar International Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James C. Cook, Executive Vice President and 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 Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ James C. Cook                                   
|James C. Cook                                       
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|August 6, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.2


                           CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING  OFFICER

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, the  undersigned  officer of GPS Industries, Inc.
(the "Company") hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:

                  (i) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the
         quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



Dated:  November 19, 2007                                /s/ JOSEPH MILLER
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Joseph Miller
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
#### State Division of Human Rights, Respondent, v Stromberg Carlson Corporation, Petitioner, and I. U. E., Local No. 338, Respondent.

Determination unanimously reversed insofar as it awarded damages and otherwise confirmed, without costs, and matter remitted to State Division of Human Rights for further proceedings in accordance with memorandum in *SDHR (Truitt) v Stromberg Carlson Corp.*(66 AD2d 990). (Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law, § 298.) Present—Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Hancock, Jr., JJ.
# C_2008209EN.01004001.xml

| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/40

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2008 — Saint-Gobain Gyproc Belgium v Commission

(Case T-50/03) (1)

1

(Competition - Cartels - Plasterboard market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Fine - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Attenuating circumstances)

(2008/C 209/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Saint-Gobain Gyproc Belgium NV, previously BPB Belgium NV, previously Gyproc Benelux NV (Beveren-Kallo, Belgium) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, P. L'Ecluse and M. Favart, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented initially by F. Castillo de la Torre and C. Ingen-Housz and subsequently by F. Castillo de la Torre and F. Arbault, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Action under Articles 229 EC and 230 EC for the reduction of the fine imposed on Gyproc by Commission Decision 2005/471/EC of 27 November 2002 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] against BPB plc, Gebrüder Knauf Westdeutsche Gipswerke KG, Société Lafarge SA and Gyproc Benelux NV (Case No COMP/E-1/37.152 — Plasterboard) (OJ 2005 L 166, p. 8)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Saint-Gobain Gyproc Belgium NV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Saint-Gobain Gyproc Belgium NV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 101, 26.4.2003.

1

---