alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.1
                             COMPENSATION AGREEMENT

      This Compensation Agreement is dated as of July 25, 2006 by and between
Pride Business Development Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company")
and Marc Ross (the "Consultant"), a member of Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference
LLP.

      WHEREAS, the Company has requested the Consultant to provide the Company
with legal services in connection with their business, and the Consultant has
agreed to provide the Company with such legal services; and

      WHEREAS, the Company wishes to compensate the Consultant with shares of
its common stock for such services rendered;

      NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter
stated, it is agreed as follows:

1.    The Company will issue to the Consultant, from time to time upon
request of the Consultant to the Company an aggregate of 150,000 shares of the
Company's common stock, $.001 par value per share (the "Common Stock").
Subsequent to the filing of a registration statement on Form S-8 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission registering such shares, as set forth in
Section 2 below, the shares of Common Stock to be issued shall represent
consideration for services to be performed by the Consultant on behalf of the
Company.

2.    The above compensation shall be registered using a Form S-8. The
Company shall file such Form S-8 with the Securities and Exchange Commission
within 30 days of the execution of this agreement.


      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Compensation Agreement has been executed by the
Parties as of the date first above written.

                                      PRIDE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS, INC.


                                      /s/ Ari Markow
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                        Ari Markow, President


                                      /s/ Marc Ross
                                      -----------------------------------------
                                        Marc Ross
§ 573.160 Ammoniated rice hulls. The food additive ammoniated rice hulls may be safely used in accordance with the following prescribed conditions: ( a ) The food additive is the product obtained by the treatment of ground rice hulls with monocalcium phosphate and anhydrous ammonia at a temperature of 350 °F and a pressure of 175 pounds per square inch.
( b ) It is used or intended for use in the feed of beef cattle as a source of crude fiber and as the sole source of nonprotein nitrogen in an amount not to exceed 20 percent of the total ration.
( c ) To assure safe use of the additive, the label and labeling of the additive and of any feed additive supplement, feed additive concentrate, or feed additive premix prepared therefrom, shall contain, in addition to other information required by the act, the following: ( 1 ) The name of the additive.
( 2 ) The maximum percentage of equivalent crude protein from the nonprotein nitrogen.
( 3 ) Directions for use to provide not more than 20 percent of the additive in the total ration, and a prominent statement: “Warning—This feed should be used only in accordance with the directions furnished on the label.”
#### Petro Realty Corporation *v.*Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Enfield

*Robert B. Berger,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

Argued March 4

decided March 4, 1969

It appearing that the plaintiff in the above-entitled case has failed to prosecute its appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed.

The appellant filed a motion for reargument which was denied.
#### § 522.1680 Oxytocin.

(a) *Specifications.* Each milliliter (mL) of solution contains 20 USP units oxytocin.

(b) *Sponsors.* See Nos. 054771 and 061133 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.

(c) *Conditions of use* —

(1) *Amount* —

(i) *Obstetrical.* Administer drug intravenously, intramuscularly, or subcutaneously under aseptic conditions as indicated. The following dosages are recommended and may be repeated as conditions require:

| | mL | U.S.P. units |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cats | 0.25 to 0.5 | 5 to 10. |
| Dogs | 0.25 to 1.5 | 5 to 30. |
| Ewes, Sows | 1.5 to 2.5 | 30 to 50. |
| Cows, Horses | 5.0 | 100. |

(ii) *Milk letdown.* Intravenous administration is desirable. The following dosage is recommended and may be repeated as conditions require:

| | mL | U.S.P. units |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cows | 0.5 to 1.0 | 10 to 20. |
| Sows | 0.25 to 1.0 | 5 to 20. |

(2) *Indications for use.* Oxytocin may be used as a uterine contractor to precipitate and accelerate normal parturition and postpartum evacuation of uterine debris. In surgery it may be used postoperatively following cesarean section to facilitate involution and resistance to the large inflow of blood. It will contract smooth muscle cells of the mammary gland for milk letdown if the udder is in proper physiological state.

(3) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.

[44 FR 63097, Nov. 2, 1979; 45 FR 1019, Jan. 4, 1980]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting § 522.1680, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
§ 582.5695 Riboflavin. ( a ) *Product.* Riboflavin.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement  Nos.
33-46559, 33-46561, 33-46563, 33-46573, 33-68806, 33-68808, 33-62631and 33-62633
of Elcotel,  Inc. on Forms S-8, of our report dated June 20, 2000,  appearing in
this Annual  Report on Form 10-K of Elcotel,  Inc.  for the year ended March 31,
2000.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE

Tampa, Florida
June 30, 2000
# C_2014339EN.01001101.xml

| 29.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 339/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 339/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 21 July 2014 — Minister delegate for the budget v Marlène Pazdziej

(Case C-349/14)

2014/C 339/12

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Minister delegate for the budget

Applicant:

Defendant: Marlène Pazdziej

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Do the provisions of the second paragraph of Article [13] of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union preclude any account being taken, for the purposes of calculating a tax household’s notional income, of the remuneration received by an official or other servant of the European Union who is a member of that tax household, where such taking into account is capable of influencing the amount of taxation payable by that tax household? Alternatively, is it necessary to apply the judgment in Case C-229/98 Vander Zwalmen and Massart (1) by analogy, when the purpose of taking such remuneration into account, with a view to the possibility of applying a social measure designed to (a) exempt payment from tax, (b) grant a reduction in the basis of its assessment or, more generally, (c) grant a tax reduction, is only to ascertain whether or not the notional income of the tax household is less than the threshold laid down by national tax law for the grant of the benefit — possibly adjusted by reference to the notional income — of that social measure?

1

---

(1)  EU:C:1999:501.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATETD BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE 9/30/96 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,423
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,430
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        478
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,305
<PP&E>                                           6,912
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,891)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,597
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,332
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        61,233
<OTHER-SE>                                    (47,231)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,024
<SALES>                                          5,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,806
<CGS>                                            2,395
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,395
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   791
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  31
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    492
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                492
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       492
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
#### Thomas La Bonte et al. *v.*Federal Mutual Insurance Company

*David M. Reilly, Jr.,*in support of the petition.

*William F. Geenty*and *James G. Kenefick, Jr.,*in opposition.

Submitted June 10

decided July 16, 1969

The petition by the defendant for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is granted.
<PAGE>   1







                                  EXHIBIT 23.1
<PAGE>   2
                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Moovies, Inc.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-8 of Moovies, Inc. of our report dated February 24, 1997, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Moovies, Inc. as of December 31, 1995 and 1996,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and
partners' equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which report appears in the December
31, 1996 annual report on Form 10-K of Moovies, Inc.



Greenville, South Carolina                            /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
March 28, 1997                                        KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
§ 582.5381 Isoleucine. ( a ) *Product.* Isoleucine (L- and DL-forms).
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________
No. 97-50185 Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARESTEDE JAMES TREADWAY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-96-CR-241-1

_________________________________________________________________ March 13, 1998 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Arestede James Treadway (“Treadway”) pleaded guilty to being

a felon in possession of a firearm and to possession of an
unregistered firearm and was sentenced to 120 months imprisonment

on both counts to run concurrently.

Treadway entered into a plea agreement by which he waived his

right to appeal his sentence on any grou nd except to the extent

that the punishment imposed exceeded the statutory maximum for his

offense. Because 120 months does not exceed the statutory maximum-2-

of ten years for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)(firearm

possession by a convicted felon) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d)(possession

of a short barreled shotgun), we hold that this appeal is frivolous

and therefore dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Melancon
, 972 F.2d 566, 568 (5th Cir. 1992).

Counsel for Treadway is cautioned against filing further

frivolous appeals and warned that such further filings may result

in sanctions. If a defendant in a criminal case insists on

pursuing a friv olous appeal, the appropriate course of action is

for counsel to file a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 368

U.S. 738 (1967).

All motions not previously ruled on are DENIED.

MOTIONS DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED.

SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-3227

___________ David Williams, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Correctional Medical Services; Paul * Eastern District of Arkansas. Torrez, CMS Regional Administrator; * Arthur Culpepper, CMS Ombudsman; * [UNPUBLISHED] Patricia Kelly, Dr.; Connie Hubbard, * A.N.P., Varner Super Max, ADC; Kay * Brodnax, Infirmary Manager; Laura * McCarty, CMS Grievance Responder, * Varner Unit, ADC; Larry Norris, * Director, Arkansas Department of * Correction; Max Mobley, ADC Deputy * Director, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 7, 2006 Filed: February 15, 2006

___________ Before RILEY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.1 The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief J udge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adop ting the report and recommendations of the Honorable H. David Young, United States Ma gistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
-2- In this interlocutory appeal, Arkansas inmate David Williams challenges the district court’s 1 order denying his motion for a pr eliminary injunction. Following careful review of the record, including c onsideration of the factors discussed in Dataphase Sys., Inc. v. CL Sys., Inc. , 640 F.2d 109, 113 (8th Ci r. 1981) (en banc), we agree with the district court that Williams did not meet his burden of establishing a preliminary injunction should issue with re gard to his claims concerning Hepatitis C testing and treatment. SeeManion v. Nagin , 255 F.3d 535, 538 (8th Cir. 2001) (“A district court has broad discretion when ru ling on requests for preliminary injunctions, and [court of appeals] will re verse only for clearly errone ous factual determinations, an error of law, or abuse of di scretion.”); Dataphase Sys., Inc. , 640 F.2d at 113 (to determine whether injunctive relief is warranted, court must balance threat of irreparable harm to movant, harm to nonmoving party should injunction issue, likelihood of success on merits, and public in terest). Williams has no standing here to seek injunctive relief on beha lf of other inmates. SeeMeis v. Gunter , 906 F.2d 364, 366-68 (8th Cir. 1990). In addition, Williams did not assert or show that he was personally under a threat of irreparable harm necessitating the injunctive relief he sought, nor did he establish a likelihood of success on the merits. See generally Bender v. Regier , 385 F.3d 1133, 1135 (8th Cir. 2004) (discussing Hepatitis C).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________
§ 520.2041 Pyrantel pamoate chewable tablets. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each tablet contains pyrantel pamoate equivalent to 22.7 or 113.5 milligrams pyrantel base.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See Nos. 017135 and 051311 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Provides at least 2.27 milligrams pyrantel base per pound body weight for dogs weighing more than 5 pounds, and at least 4.54 milligrams of pyrantel base per pound body weight for dogs weighing 5 pounds or less.
( 2 ) *Indications for use* — ( i ) *In dogs and puppies.* For removal of ascarids (*Toxocara canis; Toxascaris leonina*) and hookworms (*Ancylostoma caninum; Uncinaria stenocephala*).
( ii ) In puppies and adult dogs and in lactating bitches after whelping. To prevent reinfection of *Toxocara canis.*
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Administer to puppies at 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 weeks of age. Administer to lactating bitches 2 to 3 weeks after whelping. Retreatment of adult dogs may be necessary at monthly intervals as determined by laboratory fecal examinations. Consult your veterinarian for assistance in the diagnosis, treatment, and control of parasitism.
[52 FR 37937, Oct. 13, 1987, as amended at 57 FR 48163, Oct. 22, 1992; 58 FR 44611, Aug. 24, 1993; 66 FR 9650, Feb. 9, 2001; 67 FR 21996, May 2, 2002; 81 FR 22523, Apr. 18, 2016; 82 FR 12169, Mar. 1, 2017; 84 FR 8973, Mar. 13, 2019]
Editorial Note on Part 316
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 316 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

§ 316.27 Change in ownership of orphan-drug designation. ( a ) A sponsor may transfer ownership of or any beneficial interest in the orphan-drug designation of a drug to a new sponsor. At the time of the transfer, the new and former owners are required to submit the following information to FDA: ( 1 ) The former owner or assignor of rights shall submit a letter or other document that states that all or some rights to the orphan-drug designation of the drug have been transferred to the new owner or assignee and that a complete copy of the request for orphan-drug designation, including any amendments to the request, supplements to the granted request, and correspondence relevant to the orphan-drug designation, has been provided to the new owner or assignee.
( 2 ) The new owner or assignee of rights shall submit a statement accepting orphan-drug designation and a letter or other document containing the following: ( i ) The date that the change in ownership or assignment of rights is effective;
( ii ) A statement that the new owner has a complete copy of the request for orphan-drug designation including any amendments to the request, supplements to the granted request, and correspondence relevant to the orphan-drug designation; and
( iii ) A specific description of the rights that have been assigned and those that have been reserved. This may be satisfied by the submission of either a list of rights assigned and reserved or copies of all relevant agreements between assignors and assignees; and
( iv ) The name and address of a new primary contact person or resident agent.
( b ) No sponsor may relieve itself of responsibilities under the Orphan Drug Act or under this part by assigning rights to another person without: ( 1 ) Assuring that the sponsor or the assignee will carry out such responsibilities; or
( 2 ) Obtaining prior permission from FDA.
[57 FR 62085, Dec. 29, 1992; 58 FR 6167, Jan. 26, 1993]
§ 352.1 Scope. ( a ) An over-the-counter sunscreen drug product in a form suitable for topical administration is generally recognized as safe and effective and is not misbranded if it meets each condition in this part and each general condition established in § 330.1 of this chapter.
( b ) References in this part to regulatory sections of the Code of Federal Regulations are to Chapter I of Title 21 unless otherwise noted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1999
<CASH>                                          16,602
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  464,076
<ALLOWANCES>                                    54,773
<INVENTORY>                                    517,850
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               977,930
<PP&E>                                         804,079
<DEPRECIATION>                                 327,352
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,141,876
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          531,413
<BONDS>                                      1,217,066
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           213
<OTHER-SE>                                     118,111
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,141,876
<SALES>                                        518,715
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               518,715
<CGS>                                          389,546
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  389,546
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,728
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,699
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,716)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,664)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,302)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,302)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.44)


</TABLE>