alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WWW.EXFILE.COM -- 13348 -- MEDIS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. -- EXHIBIT 10.20




EXHIBIT
10.20

 

LEASE
SUMMARY




Landlord — Africa Israel Ltd.




Facility — 2
Yodfat Street, Lod, Israel 71291




Execution
date — April
15, 2004, as supplemented on June 17, 2004 and January 19, 2005 to increase the
square footage under the original lease.




Lease
area — 3,284
m2 (35,348
ft2)
including relative part in the public areas. This does not include approximately
242 m2 (2,600
ft2) Medis
previously leased at the facility.




Lease
period —
December 1, 2004 through November 30, 2009.




Option
periods — 2
option period of 30 months each after the lease period. The price for the first
option period will be an addition of 12%. The price for the second option
period will be an addition of 5%.




Participation
of Landlord in the construction budget — Landlord
will contribute the sum of $350 per m2 for the
square footage under the original lease and the first supplement and $309 per
m2 for the
square footage under the second supplement, for a total of
$1,037,000.




Construction
budget — The
budget refers to building of offices and laboratories, not including equipment,
carpentry, special equipment, Biological & Chemical safety cabinets,
blowers, gas systems, control systems and security systems, but preparation of
infrastructure for these systems is included. The landlord will charge Medis 10%
of the construction cost budget for its roll as general contractor and
supervisor.

 

Right
to terminate the contract against compensation. — Medis
will have the right to terminate the contract with 6 months advanced notice,
after 36 months or after 48 months against payment of 40% or 20%, respectively,
of the construction budget. Additionally, Medis has the right to terminate the
contract at any point if it will be able to find another tenant approved by the
landlord. 




Lease
payments — Except as
described in the next sentence, the lease payments for the first 30 months shall
be $9.00 per m2 per
month and for the second 30 months shall be $9.50 per m2 per
month, plus expenses for management and maintenance of approximately $2.00 per
m2 per
month. The lease payments for 283 m2 of the
space shall be $5.00 per m2 per
month. Payment shall be made in New Israeli Shekels and will be linked to the
consumer price index. The payments will be made in three month
installments.




Bank
guarantee — Medis
will provide a bank guarantee in an amount equivalent to 6 months rent payments
(cost of approximately $1,500 each year).
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.2 RULE 13A-14(A) CERTIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Edward D. Ford, Director and acting Chief Accounting Officer of International Gemini Technology
Inc. (the Company), certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of the Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The Companys other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the Company and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in
this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the Companys internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting;
and 5. The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of
the Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Companys
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the Companys internal control over financial reporting. Date: June 29, 2005 /s/ Edward D. FordEdward D. FordDirector and acting Chief Accounting Officer
#### § 3430.1011 Duration of awards.

The term of a Federal assistance award made under the Sun Grant Program shall not exceed 5 years. No-cost extensions of time beyond the maximum award terms will not be considered or granted.
EXHIBIT 32

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of BlackRock Capital Investment Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30,
2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Steven F. Sterling, as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Donna Milia, as Interim Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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; and

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



|                       |  |                                                  
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steven F. Sterling
|Name:                  |  | Steven F. Sterling                               
|Title:                 |  | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                  |  | November 4, 2015                                 
|                      
|/s/ Donna M. Milia    
|Name:                  |  | Donna M. Milia                                   
|Title:                 |  | Interim Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer    
|Date:                  |  | November 4, 2015
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Randolph Gress, certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2006 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Innophos, Inc.
at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
Innophos, Inc. and will be retained by Innophos, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: November 14, 2006



/s/ RANDOLPH GRESSRandolph GressChief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
§ 301.1-2 Criteria for special need requests. ( a ) A special need request, as described in § 301.1, may be generated by a State or a political subdivision of a State. If the request is generated by a political subdivision of a State, the request must be submitted to APHIS through the State. States may also collaborate with other States to submit multi-State special need requests. However, if submitted, the multi-State special need request must include information in sufficient detail to allow APHIS to analyze the impacts on each State on an individual basis. All special need requests must be signed by the executive official or officials or by a plant protection official or officials of the State(s) making the request and must contain the following: ( 1 ) Data drawn from a scientifically sound detection survey, showing that the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest of concern does not exist in the State or political subdivision or, if already present in the State or political subdivision, the distribution of the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest of concern;
( 2 ) If the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest is not present in the State or political subdivision, a risk analysis or other scientific data showing that the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest could enter the State or political subdivision and become established;
( 3 ) Specific information showing that, if introduced into or allowed to spread within the State or political subdivision, the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest would harm or injure the environment or agricultural resources in the State or political subdivision. The request should contain detailed information, including quantitative estimates, if available, about what harm or injury would result from the introduction or dissemination of the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest in the State or political subdivision;
( 4 ) Specific information showing that the State or political subdivision has characteristics that make it particularly vulnerable to the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest, such as unique plants, diversity of flora, historical concerns, or any other special basis for the request for additional restrictions or prohibitions; and
( 5 ) Information detailing the proposed additional prohibitions or restrictions and scientific data demonstrating that the proposed additional prohibitions or restrictions are necessary and adequate, and that there is no less drastic action that is feasible and that would be adequate, to prevent the introduction or spread of the biological control organism, noxious weed, or plant pest in the State or political subdivision.
( b ) All special need requests must be submitted to the Deputy Administrator for Plant Protection and Quarantine, APHIS, USDA, Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Room 301-E, Washington, DC 20250.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

BRIAN M. CASEY and CORNELIUS 

CANADY,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 4:19-cv-491-AW-MJF

CENTURION OF FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

After this case was removed from state court, Plaintiff Brian Casey moved to 

remand it. ECF No. 28. I have considered the magistrate judge’s October 23, 2020 

Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 43, and I have considered de novo the issues 

raised in Casey’s objection, ECF No. 46. I now conclude that the Report and 

Recommendation should be adopted. This court had arising-under jurisdiction when 

Defendants removed the case. The supplemental complaint presents claims based on 

federal law. And even if Casey were correct in arguing that the supplemental 

complaint should not be considered, his original complaint also presented claims 

based on federal law.

It is now ORDERED:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 43) is adopted and 

incorporated into this order.

Case 4:19-cv-00491-AW-MJF Document 48 Filed 11/23/20 Page 1 of 2
2

2. The motion to remand (ECF No. 28) is DENIED. 

3. The magistrate judge will conduct further appropriate proceedings.

SO ORDERED on November 23, 2020.

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 4:19-cv-00491-AW-MJF Document 48 Filed 11/23/20 Page 2 of 2
exh10bii.htm


     

    
      
        
          
            
              	 	
                       The
      Dow Chemical Company and Subsidiaries

                    	
                       EXHIBIT
      10(b)(ii)

                    
	 	
                       

                       

                    	 


            

          

        

      

       

    

    1979 Award and Option Plan
Amended

    


    


    RESOLVED,
that Section 2(o) of The Dow Chemical Company 1979 Award and Option Plan be
amended to read as follows:

    


    “Subsidiary:  Any
business association (including a corporation or partnership), other than the
Company, in a unbroken chain of such associations beginning with the Company if
each of the associations other than the last association in the unbroken chain
owns equity interests (including stock or partnership interests) possessing 50%
or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of equity interest in
one of the other associations in such chain.”

    


    
      
         

      

      
        67
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. 4:91cr4010-WS

FREDDIE RICHARDSON, 4:05cv419-WS

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 483)

docketed January 3, 2006. The magistrate judge recommends that the defendant's

motion for post-trial relief be summarily dismissed because authorization for filing a

second or successive motion has not been granted. The defendant has filed objections

(doc. 484) to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record in light of the defendant’s objections, the court has

determined that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation must be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 483) is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

Case 4:91-cr-04010-WS-WCS Document 485 Filed 01/30/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:91cr4010-WS

2. The defendant’s motion for post-trail relief (doc. 482) is hereby summarily

DISMISSED.

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and shall close Case No.

4:05cv419-WS.

DONE AND ORDERED this January 30, 2006.

 /s William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:91-cr-04010-WS-WCS Document 485 Filed 01/30/06 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Annual Report of PSS, Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended  November 2, 2002,  as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Carite Torpey,  Vice
President and Treasurer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that,
to the best of my knowledge:

         (3)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
               or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
         (4)   The information  contained in the report fairly presents,  in all
               material  respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of
               operations of the Company.

January 31, 2003

                                                /s/ CARITE TORPEY
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Carite Torpey
                                                Principal Financial Officer



                                       29
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Sang Park, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MagnaChip Semiconductor LLC;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 14, 2006



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|/s/ Sang Park                        
|Sang Park                            
|Chief Executive Officer and President
Dominion Homes, Inc. 2005 Director Compensation Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.23 
  
 Dominion Homes, Inc. 2005 Director Compensation Plan 
  

	1.	$40,000 annual fee for each outside director ($10,000 per quarter) 

  

	2.	Additional $5,000 annual fee for each Audit Committee member (other than Audit Committee Chair) and each committee Chair (other than Audit Committee Chair) ($1,250 per quarter)


  

	3.	Additional $10,000 annual fee for Audit Committee Chair ($2,500 per quarter) 

  

	4.	Additional $20,000 annual fee for the Lead Director ($5,000 per quarter) 

  
 Director and Committee Fees shall be paid quarterly in advance. 
  

	5.	Each outside director also receives, on the first day after the annual meeting, a grant of non-qualified stock options to purchase 2,500 common shares at an exercise price equal to
the fair market value of the common shares on the date of grant.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-8127

JEROD E. FRAIERSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District 

Judge. (1:12-cv-00882-LO-TCB)

Submitted: May 30, 2013 Decided: June 4, 2013

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerod E. Fraierson, Appellant Pro Se. Leah A. Darron, OFFICE OF 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jerod E. Fraierson seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Fraierson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED