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



EXHIBIT 10.14
 Form of Voting Common Stock Purchase Warrant
 ACT
 AXCESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.  Voting Common Stock Purchase Warrant
  A.
    
    This Warrant is issued to  or its successors in interest,
assigns or transferees (collectively, the Warrant Holder), in consideration for their
Participation in the 2006C Preferred Equity transactions by Axcess International, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the Company).;B.
    
    The total number of shares of the Companys Voting Common Stock (as defined in Section 9(a)
hereof) (the Warrant Shares) to be issued to the Warrant Holder is  shares
(*** ***); andC.
    
    This Warrant shall be exercisable at any time and from time to time on or prior to the
January 29, 2012.D.
    
    This Warrant shall be callable by the Company if and when the Companys common stock share
price exceeds $5.00 per share for at least 20 consecutive trading days. The Company shall
notify the holder and the holder shall have twenty (20) business days to acknowledge and fund
the exercised of the warrant.
 Exercise Price
 Section 1. Exercise of Warrant .
 ANNEX
A Total Exercise Price
 Section 2. Investment Representation .
  Section 3. Validity of Warrant and Issue of Shares .




---



##### 



Section 4. Transfer of Rights .
 ANNEX B Warrant
 Section 5. Lost, Mutilated or Missing Warrant .
  Section 6. Rights of Warrant Holder .
  Section 7. Successors .
  Section 8. Miscellaneous .
   Section 9. Notices .
  
    AXCESS INTERNATIONAL INC.By:Allan Frank, Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 1 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 1

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF JOINT COMMITTEE.

    Effective from January 3, 2017, the joint committee created by 
Senate Concurrent Resolution 28 (114th Congress), to make the necessary 
arrangements for the inauguration of the President-elect and the Vice 
President-elect of the United States, is continued with the same power 
and authority provided for in that resolution.

SEC. 2. USE OF CAPITOL.

    Effective from January 3, 2017, the provisions of Senate Concurrent 
Resolution 29 (114th Congress), to authorize the use of the rotunda and 
Emancipation Hall of the Capitol by the Joint Congressional Committee 
on Inaugural Ceremonies in connection with the proceedings and 
ceremonies conducted for the inauguration of the President-elect and 
the Vice President-elect of the United States are continued with the 
same power and authority provided for in that resolution.

            Passed the Senate January 3, 2017.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
115th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                             S. CON. RES. 1

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 Extending the life of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural 
                              Ceremonies.
```
Sub

j ec t : M ee t i n g w i t h t h e R e v e r e S m e l t i ng a n d R e f

i n i ng ( R S R ) C o r p o r a

t i o n

L o c a t i o n : U

. S

. E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t ec t i o n A g e n c y

, R T P

, N C

D a t e : D ec e m b e r 20

, 201 0

P a r t i c i p a n t s : C h u c k F r e n c h , E P A

N a t h a n T o p h a m , E P A

M i a S o u t h

, E P A

H o m e r H i n e

, R S R

M i c h a e l B u c k a n t z

, R S R

C h r i s t o p h e r B r y a n t

, B e r g e s o n & C a m p b e l l

, P

. C

.

M i k e B u rr

, E R G

D o nn a L azza r i , E R G

T h e U

. S

. E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y ( E P A ) m e t w it h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e R e v e r e

S m e l t i ng a n d R e f

i n i ng ( R S R ) C o r p o r a

t i o n . T h e pu r p o s e o f t h e m ee t i n g w a s t o d i s c u ss t h e

c o n t r o l t ec hn o l og i e s im

p l e m e n t e d a t t h

r ee f a c i l it i e s o w n e d b y R S R a n d a l s o t o d i s c u s s t h e

o n g o i n g R i s k a n d T ec h n o l og y R e v i e w ( R T R ) f o r t h e s e c o n d a r y l ea d s m e l t i ng s o u r ce ca t e g o r y

.

A b r i e f s u m m a r y o f t h e k e y p o i n t s i s o u t li n e d b e l o w

.

• R S R i n f

o r m e d E P A t h a t t w o o f t h e i

r f a c il it i e s i n I n d i a n a a n d N e w Y o r k h a v e

p l a n s t o i n s t a l l a w e t e l ec t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p it a t o r ( W E SP )

.

• R S R e x p l a i n e d t h e m a j o r f u g it i v e e mi ss i o n s c o n t r o l p r ac t i c e s e m p l o y e d a t t h e i

r

f a c il i t y t o E P A

. T h e s e i n c l ud e t o t a l n e g a t i v e p r e s s u r e e n c l o s u r e s

, a m b i e n t l ea d

m o n i t o r i n g

, a n d i n s t a ll a t i o n o f t h e W E SP a n d a n a u t o m a t i c r o o f t o p s p r i n k l e r

s y s t e m a t t h e C i t y o f I n du s t r y f a c il it y

. R S R c l a i m s t h a t t o t a l e n c l o s u r e s a r e t h e

b e s t a n d m

o s t im p o r t a n t f u g it i v e c o n t r o l p r ac t i c e

.

• E P A a s k e d R S R t h e m o t i v a t i o n b e h i nd i n s t a l l i ng a r e g e n e r a t i v e t h e r m a l o x i d i ze r

( R T O ) a t t h e i r C i t y o f I n du s t r y f

a c il it y

. R S R e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e R T O w a s

i n s t a ll e d i n r e s p o n s e t o o d o r c o m p l a i n t s f r o m R S R ’ s n e i g h b o r s a n d t h a t R S R w a s

n o t i n d a n g e r o f e x cee d i ng t h e t o t a l h y d r o ca r b o n s ( T H C ) e mi ss i o n s li m it s i n t h e

N E S H A P

.

• R S R e x p l a i n e d t h a t a ll o f t h e i r f a c il it i e s im

p l e m e n t “ G o r e o n G o r e” b a g s

, w h i c h

t h e y c l a i m t o b e t h e m

o s t e f f i c i e n t f o r p r im a r y l o a d s

. R S R a l s o e x p l a i n e d t h a t

t h e y n e v e r r e p a i

r b a g s o n ce a p r o b l e m i s d e t ec t e d

, t h e y r e p l a ce t h e m

.

• R S R d i s c u s s e d t h e i

r p l a n s t o r e p l ace t h e r e f

i n e r y b a g h o u s e a t t h e C it y o f I n du s t r y

f a c il i t y

.
#### In the Matter of Irving G. Cummins, Respondent, v. Flushing National Bank et al., Appellants.

In a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act by a director and stockholder of the respondent Flushing National Bank, to direct it to submit all its 'books and records to him for inspection, and for a stay of any meeting of its stockholders pending such inspection, the bank and its president (the respondent Leonard J. Walsh) appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 19, 1963, as: (1) directed the bank to submit at its office all its “books, records, papers and contracts” for inspection by the petitioner and by counsel to be selected by him; (2) permitted the petitioner “and his attorneys, accountants or other agents to make copies of any and all such books, records, correspondence and papers; ” and (3) directed that the inspection continue “for as long as necessary to complete the same.” Order modified on the facts and in the exercise of discretion: (a) by limiting the duration of the inspection to 10 business days; and (b) by limiting the petitioner’s assistants at the inspection to one attorney or to one accountant, or to one attorney and one accountant. As so modified, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs and with leave to petitioner, if so advised and upon a showing of need for additional time to complete the inspection, to apply to Special Term for an extension of the 10-day period. The inspection shall proceed at the office of the bank on 10 days’ written notice or at such other time and place as the parties may mutually stipulate in writing. On the facts here presented, it is our opinion that a period of 10 days is sufficient time for the desired inspection, and that the petitioner does not need the assistance of more than one attorney or one accountant or one of each. Hence, to avoid unnecessary interference with the bank’s conduct of its business, we think the inspection should be limited as here indicated. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### Peggy Friedman et al., Appellants, v. Jack Allen et al., Respondents.

In an action to recover damages for injury to person and property, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 1, 1964, which denied their motion to restore the action to the Trial Calendar. The action had been “ marked off ” by reason of plaintiffs’ failure to appear at a Pretrial Calendar call. Order modified so as to provide that the denial of the motion is without prejudice to renewal upon proper papers supported by a statement of readiness and an affidavit showing the merits of the action, as required by the rules of this court (pt. 7, rule V). As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. On this record, we believe plaintiffs would have been entitled to restoration of the action to the Trial Calendar had their moving papers been supported by a proper statement of readiness and an affidavit of merits, as required by rule V of part 7 of the rules of this court. Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-11223

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WILLIAM ALLEN TILLEY,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:10-CR-49-1

Before WIENER, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant William Allen Tilley’s probation was revoked and he

was sentenced to 60 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised

release and ordered to pay the $15,000 fine originally imposed. In his sole issue

for appeal, he contends that there is a clerical error in the judgment of the

offense of conviction that should be remanded for correction.

The judgment for the offense of conviction states that Tilley was convicted

of conspiracy to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)(D). 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 29, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-11223 Document: 00511709396 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/29/2011
No. 10-11223

Tilley was charged with violating § 841(b)(1)(D), and § 841(a)(1)(D) does not

exist. Cf. § 841.

The case is remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of

correcting the original judgment to reflect that Tilley was convicted and

sentenced under § 841(b)(1)(D) rather than § 841(a)(1)(D). See FED. R. CRIM.

P. 36. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED in all other respects. 

2

Case: 10-11223 Document: 00511709396 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/29/2011
1 From : "Szabo, Aaron" < Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov >

Date: May 21, 2015 at 7:10:49 PM EDT

To: "Brachtl, Megan" < Brachtl.Megan@epa.gov >

Subject: RE: EPA SSM SIP: final action

‐‐ edits since 04

‐ 30

‐ 15 version of draft final rule

Megan,

Reviewers have no additional comments based on the revised redline

‐ strikeout version provided within

the previous email. Please upload a clean version of this draft final rule to ROCIS. Thank you very mu ch

for your assistance.

From: Brachtl, Megan [ mailto:Brachtl.Megan@epa.gov ]

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 5:12 PM

To: Szabo, Aaron

Subject: EPA SSM SIP: final action

‐‐ edits since 04

‐ 30

‐ 15 version of draft final rule

Hi Aaron

– The attached redline

‐ strikeout version of this draft final action reflects edits made to the

package since EPA submitted a revised version to OM B on 04

‐ 30

‐ 15 during the interagency review

period.

Best regards,

Megan

Megan V. Brachtl, Group Leader

State and Local Programs Group

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(919) 541

‐ 2648

brachtl.megan@epa.gov
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 764 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the enrollment of veterans 

in certain courses of education, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 29, 2017 

Mr. BROWN (for himself and Mr. TILLIS) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the 

enrollment of veterans in certain courses of education, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Education 

5 Priority Enrollment Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PRIORITY ENROLLMENT FOR VETERANS IN CER7 TAIN COURSES OF EDUCATION. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 36 of 

9 title 38, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 

10 section 3680A the following new section: 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 764 IS

1 ‘‘§ 3680B. Priority enrollment in certain courses 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to an educational 

3 assistance program provided for in chapter 30, 31, 32, 33, 

4 or 35 of this title or chapter 1606 or 1607 of title 10, 

5 if an educational institution administers a priority enroll6 ment system that allows certain students to enroll in 

7 courses earlier than other students, the Secretary or a 

8 State approving agency may not approve a program of 

9 education offered by such institution unless such institu10 tion allows a covered individual to enroll in courses at the 

11 earliest possible time pursuant to such priority enrollment 

12 system. 

13 ‘‘(b) COVERED INDIVIDUAL DEFINED.—In this sec14 tion, the term ‘covered individual’ means an individual 

15 using educational assistance under chapter 30, 31, 32, 33, 

16 or 35 of this title or chapter 1606 or 1607 of title 10, 

17 including— 

18 ‘‘(1) a veteran; 

19 ‘‘(2) a member of the Armed Forces serving on 

20 active duty or a member of a reserve component (in21 cluding the National Guard); 

22 ‘‘(3) a dependent to whom such assistance has 

23 been transferred pursuant to section 3319 of this 

24 title; and 

25 ‘‘(4) any other individual using such assist26 ance.’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 764 IS

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

2 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting 

3 after the item relating to section 3680A the following new 

4 item: 

‘‘3680B. Priority enrollment in certain courses.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
19.1307 Price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns. ( a ) The price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns shall be used in acquisitions conducted using full and open competition. The preference shall not be used— ( 1 ) Where price is not a selection factor so that a price evaluation preference would not be considered (e.g., Architect/Engineer acquisitions);
( 2 ) Where all fair and reasonable offers are accepted (e.g., the award of multiple award schedule contracts); or
( 3 ) For the reserved portion of a solicitation for a multiple-award contract (see 19.503).
( b ) The contracting officer shall give offers from HUBZone small business concerns a price evaluation preference by adding a factor of 10 percent to all offers, except— ( 1 ) Offers from HUBZone small business concerns that have not waived the evaluation preference; or
( 2 ) Otherwise successful offers from small business concerns.
( c ) The factor of 10 percent shall be applied on a line item basis or to any group of items on which award may be made. Other evaluation factors, such as transportation costs or rent-free use of Government property, shall be added to the offer to establish the base offer before adding the factor of 10 percent.
( d ) When the two highest rated offerors are a HUBZone small business concern and a large business, and the evaluated offer of the HUBZone small business concern is equal to the evaluated offer of the large business after considering the price evaluation preference, the contracting officer shall award the contract to the HUBZone small business concern.
[63 FR 70272, Dec. 18, 1998, as amended at 64 FR 72419, Dec. 27, 1999; 69 FR 1053, Jan. 7, 2004; 70 FR 33661, June 8, 2005; 72 FR 27384, May 15, 2007; 75 FR 77731, Dec. 13, 2010; 79 FR 61751, Oct. 14, 2014; 85 FR 11766, Feb. 27, 2020]
#### In the Matter of Marian V. Bishop et al., Respondents, v James Melton, as Commissioner of Motor Vehicles of the State of New York, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court at Special Term, entered July 24, 1978 in Albany County, which granted petitioners’ application in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. Each of the petitioners herein submitted a request to the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles to suspend the operators’ licenses of persons who unlawfully converted the petitioners’ automobiles and which autos were damaged while in their possession pursuant to section 332 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The petitioners alleged that judgments in excess of $200 against these persons for damages because of injury to or destruction of property arising out of the use or operation of any motor vehicle had remained unpaid for a period *949of 15 days. The commissioner refused to suspend the licenses in the absence of facts which compelled a finding of negligence arising from an auto accident in causing the damages alleged. Special Term found that the commissioner acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying the relief requested. We agree. The statute requires no finding of negligence before a license suspension can occur. The Court of Appeals in *Matter of Jones v Berman*(37 NY2d 42, 53) said, "Administrative agencies can only promulgate rules to further the implementation of the law as it exists; they have no authority to create a rule out of harmony with the statute”. The legislative intent manifested in the clear language of the statute to protect the public against irresponsible operators of motor vehicles would be subverted if the construction of the commissioner were to prevail. The requirements of the statute are met upon proof of failure to satisfy a judgment based upon damage to property arising out of the use or operation of any motor vehicle. A finding of negligence is not required. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.
§ 634.29 Traffic accident investigation reports. ( a ) *Accidents requiring immediate reports.* The driver or owner of any vehicle involved in an accident, as described in § 634.28, on the installation, must immediately notify the installation law enforcement office. The operator of any Government vehicle involved in a similar accident off the installation must immediately notify the local civilian law enforcement agency having jurisdiction, as well as law enforcement personnel of the nearest military installation.
( b ) *Investigation records.* Installation law enforcement officials will record traffic accident investigations on Service/DLA forms. Information will be released according to Service/DLA policy, the Privacy Act, and the Freedom of Information Act.
( c ) *Army law enforcement officers.* These officers provide the local Safety Office copies of traffic accident investigation reports pertaining to accidents investigated by military police that resulted in a fatality, personal injury, or estimated damage to Government vehicles or property in excess of $1,000.
( d ) *POV accidents not addressed in § 634.28 .* Guidance for reporting these cases is provided as follows: ( 1 ) Drivers or owners of POVs will be required to submit a written report to the installation law enforcement office within 24 hours of an accident in the following cases, with all information listed in paragraph (d)(3) of this section: ( i ) The accident occurs on the installation.
( ii ) The accident involves no personal injury.
( iii ) The accident involves only minor damage to the POV and the vehicle can be safely and normally driven from the scene under its own power.
( 2 ) Information in the written report cannot be used in criminal proceedings against the person submitting it unless it was originally categorized a hit and run and the violator is the person submitting the report. Rights advisement will be given prior to any criminal traffic statements provided by violators. Within the United States, the installation law enforcement official may require such reporting on Service forms or forms of the State jurisdiction.
( 3 ) Reports required in paragraph (d) (1) of this section by the Army will include the following about the accident: ( i ) Location, date, and time.
( ii ) Identification of all drivers, pedestrians, and passengers involved.
( iii ) Identification of vehicles involved.
( iv ) Speed and direction of travel of each vehicle involved, including a sketch of the collision and roadway with street names and north arrow.
( v ) Property damage involved.
( vi ) Environmental conditions at the time of the incident (weather, visibility, road surface condition, and other factors).
( vii ) A narrative description of the events and circumstances concerning the accident.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsROMPS critical design review. Volume 3: Furnace module design documentationAs part of the furnace module design documentation, the furnace module Easylab programs definitions and command variables are described. Also included are Easylab commands flow charts and fault conditions.Document ID19930007251Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsDobbs, M. E.*(Environmental Research Inst. of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1992Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberREPT-238800-11-T-VOL-3NAS 1.26:191615NASA-CR-191615Accession Number93N16440Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG5-1517Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930007251.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024