alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
artl_ex103.htm

EXHIBIT 10.3

 

NOTE REPAYMENT AGREEMENT

 

THIS NOTE REPAYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is dated as of May 4, 2017, by and between Artelo Biosciences, Inc. (f/k/a Knight Knox Development Corp.) (“Maker”) and Malibu Investments Limited (“Holder”).

 

RECITALS

 

WHEREAS, Maker issued a Senior Promissory Note dated as of November 18, 2016 in favor of Holder in the principal amount of $30,000, with an annual interest rate of ten percent and a maturity date of November 18, 2017 (the “Note”);

 

WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement Maker is indebted to Holder in the aggregate amount of $31,500, including accrued and unpaid interest pursuant to the Note (the “Amount Due”); and

 

WHEREAS, Maker and Holder desire to enter into this Agreement to memorialize Maker’s repayment in full of the Note.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties hereby agree as follows:

 

1. Repayment of the Note

 

Within fourteen (14) days from the execution of this Agreement, Maker shall forward to Holder a confirmation of a wire transfer of the funds representing the Amount Due.

 

2. Cancellation of the Note

 

Upon receipt of confirmation of a wire transfer, Holder shall forward the original copy of the Note marked “PAID IN FULL” on the top of the Note. In the event Holder is unable to locate the original copy of the Note, of if Holder fails to forward the original copy of the Note, Holder hereby agrees that its receipt of funds representing the Amount Due shall be conclusive evidence of Maker’s full repayment of the Note and Holder’s rights thereunder shall cease.

 

3. No Other Rights

 

Notwithstanding anything in the Note to the contrary, including, but not limited to, Holder’s rights to have the Amount Due be converted into Maker’s next private placement, Maker and Holder hereby agree that repayment of the Amount Due pursuant to the terms of this Agreement represents Maker’s full repayment of the Note and Holder shall have no rights for any further repayment, either in cash or equity, from Maker.

 

4. Entire Agreement

 

This Agreement represents the parties entire agreement regarding repayment of the Note and supersedes and replaces any and all other agreements, oral or written.

 

[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

 
	 
	
	

 
	 



 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Maker and Holder have caused this Note Repayment Agreement to be signed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first written above.

 

 


	
ARTELO BIOSCIENCES, INC.
	
 
	
MALIBU INVESTMENTS LIMITED
	
 

	
 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
By:
	/s/ Gregory Gorgas	 	
By:
	/s/ Stephen McClure	 
	
Name:
	Gregory Gorgas	 	
Name:
	Stephen McClure	 
	
Title:
	President & CEO	 	
Title:
	Director
The Valley Air District covers eight counties including San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and the Valley air 

basin portion of Kern. Visit www.valleyair.org to learn more.

News Release

For immediate release 

5-5-2013 

Attn: Local news, weather and 

assignment editors 

Media cell phone 

(559) 284-6317

Gusty winds prompt health caution 

Blowing dust in Merced, Tulare, Kings, Fresno, and the valley portion of Kern counties poses 

potential health concern 

Local air pollution officials are issuing a health cautionary statement effective through this evening, 

May 5, 2013, because of the potential for blowing dust resulting from gusty winds. The health caution 

is in effect for Merced, Tulare, Kings, Fresno, and the valley portion of Kern counties. 

Winds may produce areas of localized dust, which can result in unhealthy concentrations of 

particulate matter 10 microns and smaller (PM10). Exposure to particulate pollution can cause serious 

health problems, aggravate lung disease, trigger asthma attacks and bronchitis, and increase risk of 

respiratory infections. 

Where conditions warrant, people with heart or lung disease should follow their doctors’ advice for 

dealing with episodes of particulate exposure. Additionally, older adults and children should avoid 

prolonged exposure or heavy exertion, depending on their local conditions. 

Residents can check the nearest air monitor to their location to determine localized conditions. Visit

the Real-time Air Advisory Network page on the District’s website to subscribe for free: 

http://www.valleyair.org/Programs/RAAN/raan_landing.htm. 

For more information, visit www.valleyair.org or call a District office in Fresno (559-230-6000), 

Modesto (209-557-6400) or Bakersfield (661-381-1809).
# C_2016441EN.01001502.xml

| 28.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 441/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 441/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — August Storck v EUIPO — Chiquita Brands (Fruitfuls)

(Case T-367/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark Fruitfuls - Genuine use - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 441/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: August Storck KG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: I. Rohr, A.-C. Richter, P. Goldenbaum, T. Melchert and T. Reher, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: represented initially by A. Poch, and subsequently by G. Schneider and D. Gája and finally by D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Chiquita Brands LLC (Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America) (represented by: L. Bakers, lawyer)

Re:

Action against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2014 (Case R 1580/2013-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Chiquita Brands and August Storck.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 March 2014 (Case R 1580/2013-5) in so far as it confirmed the decision of the Cancellation Division declaring the revocation of the contested mark as regards ‘confectionery’ included in Class 30 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 March 2014 (Case R 1580/2013-5) in so far as it confirmed the decision of the Cancellation Division declaring the revocation of the contested mark as regards ‘confectionery’ included in Class 30 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.

---
S10-l()()4()5-()()l 

TRI-CITIES REGIONAL AIRPORT 

jenncjsee » virgtntf l 

March 25, 2010 

The Honorable Raymond H. LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, XyC 20590 

Docket DOT-OST-2010-fMi 

Dear Mr. Secretary: 

Thank you for the opportunity to express our support for the application for antitrust 

immunity and the proposed joint business agreement filed by American Airlines and 

Japan Airlines. We see this proposed alliance as vital for onev^'orld to compete effectively 

with the Star and SkyTeam alliances. The incr^ised interalliance competition will in turn 

enhance the benefits of the Department's Open Skies policy - first by solidifying U.S.-

Japah Open Skies, then by serving as a foundation for further liberalization across Asia. 

After a thorough review, we encourage the E>epartment of Transportation to approve this 

application as it would enable these oneworld alliance airlines to work closely together to 

deliver highly competitive air transportation services. Approval for the AA/JAL alliance 

will have a positive impact on economic development in the Northeast Tennessee/ 

Southwest Virginia/Western North Carolina region by offering business and industry 

better access to important Asian markets and further opening the Appalachian region for 

tourism.^The additional service, scheduling and pricing options that will come from 

having three competitive air alliances to choose from will be very beneficial to travelers 

who live in or visit the Tri-Cities region. 

\ urge you to quickly approve this application. 

. _. ^!: . •;( . • .•'!-.•,.;,•' . :;i . :r: . ,..••.;., . .r ' M ..• • (i ,.';,.•,.' • i,..iK , /. , < • .,. , 

aintXrCiy , • -. _ • , ir.; ,••.<:, . . .• ^- :! ^'••• i.'i-. if.r; '•; • ' " >!)> !j'i i /A - ' ' ( lui . t 

Ken Maness, Chairman 

Tri-Cities Airport Commission 

P.O. Box 1055 

Blountville.TN 37617 

khmanesl5@eharter.net 

MA. 

iniu , rK!/;iKnt.o m fv: n,'i-Jj.ii .'J.i-'-.VI K-\,0-?J,i i .>-?-<'0<^i' VIZ.;>>C) w
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                                    -113-
<PAGE>   2




                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT





The Board of Directors
Harbinger Corporation:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
33-96774) and (No. 333-03247) on Form S-8 and Registration Statement (No.
333-10893) on Form S-3 of Harbinger Corporation of our reports dated February
14, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Harbinger Corporation
as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the
two-year period ended December 31, 1996, and the related financial statement
schedule, which reports appear in the 1996 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Harbinger Corporation.





                                                           KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP




Atlanta, Georgia
March 26, 1997



                                    -114-
### SERVED : APRI L13 , 201 1 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C I N TH EMATTERO F AIRLIN ETRANSPOR T PROFESSIONAL S FA A DOCKE T NO . [T O B EASSIGNED ]

(Civi l Penalty Action ) FDM S NO . FAA-2011-028 8 

### :HARTMEN TO F \NS°0RW10 N

m! U A C: 0 8

NOTIC EO FASSIGNMEN T O FPROCEEDIN G Thi s proceedin g (heretofore designateda s Cas e No . 2008EA210045 ) ha s bee n assigne d t o th e undersigned . Al l future pleading s an dothe r communication s regardin g thi s proceedin g shal l b e serve do n th e Judge , th e FA A Hearin g Docket , an dth e othe r person s o n th e attache d Servic e List .

Ronni e A . Y o Chie f Administrativ e Attachmen t

- Servic e Lis tFDM S No . FAA-2011-028 8 (Civi l Penalty Action ) f SERVldlLlS T ORIGINiH . &PN ECOP Y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 ^ Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2#i000 ' Ala n Armstrong , Respondent' s Counse l Ala n Armstrong , Attorne y a t La w .*

—, 290 0 Chamble e Tucke r

Road , Buildin g 5 , Suit e 35 0 Atlanta , GA 3034 1 TEL : 770-451-031 3 FAX : 770-451-031 7 Geral dA.Ellis , Complainant' s Counse l Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counsel , ASO- 7 Southern Regio n Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n I f P.O . Bo x 2063 6 Atlanta , GA 3023 0 TEL : 404-305-520 0 FAX : 404-305-522 3 Th e Honorabl e Ronni e A . Yoder , Chie f Administrativ e Law Judg e U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Hearings , M-20 , Roo mE l 2-32 0 120 0 New Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Washtington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-214 2 FAX : 202-366-753 6 * ; m

' Service wa

s by U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i n person or

b y ffltpeditpdcourier , us e the followin g address : Federa

l Aviation Administration , 600 Independenc e Avenue , S.W. , Wffiw If^righ t Building—Suit

e 2W1000 , Washington , D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearing Docke t Clerk, AGC-430 .

- 2 -
# C_2015034EN.01004801.xml

| 2.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/48

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (2nd Chamber) of 11 December 2014 — Colart and Others v Parliament

(Case F-31/14) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Staff representation - Staff committee - Staff Committee elections - Rules on staff representation at the European Parliament - Competence of the Committee of Tellers - Complaints procedure before the Committee of Tellers - Publication of the election results - Complaint brought before the Committee of Tellers - Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations - No prior complaint before the appointing authority - Matter referred directly to the Tribunal - Inadmissibilty))

(2015/C 034/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Philippe Colart (Bastogne, Belgium) and Others (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: O. Caisou-Rousseau and S. Alves, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application to annul the elections for the Staff Committee of the European Parliament which were held in autumn 2013 and the results of which were published on 28 November 2013.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Declares that Mr Colart and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex are to bear half of their own costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Declares that Mr Colart and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex are to bear half of their own costs;

| 3. | Declares that the European Parliament is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay half of the costs incurred by the applicants. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Declares that the European Parliament is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay half of the costs incurred by the applicants.

---

(1)  OJ C 184, 16.6.2014, p. 45.

1

---
<PAGE>   1
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K


                                 CURRENT REPORT

                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


       Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): December 21, 1998


                         Frontier Financial Corporation
               ------------------------------------------------- 
               (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)


<TABLE>
<S>                                 <C>                 <C>   
        Washington                    0-15540               91-1223535
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(State or other jurisdiction        (Commission         (IRS Employer Identi-
      of incorporation)             File Number)          fication Number)
</TABLE>

               332 SW Everett Mall Way, Everett, Washington 98204
               --------------------------------------------------
                (Address of principal executive offices/Zip Code)

       Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (425) 514-0700


ITEM 5. Other Events

        Effective December 21, 1998, Frontier Financial Corporation, Everett,
Washington ("Frontier") completed its acquisition of Valley Bancorporation,
Sumner, Washington ("Valley"). The Acquisition was accomplished pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Mergers dated as of July 31, 1998 (the "Merger
Agreement").

        The Merger Agreement was included as Appendix A to the Proxy
Statement/Prospectus dated October 9, 1998, previously filed by Frontier as part
of its Registration Statement on Form S-4 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

ITEM 7. Financial Statements, Pro Forma Financial Information and Exhibits

        (a) Financial statements - not applicable.

        (b) Pro forma financial information - not applicable.



                                        1
<PAGE>   2

        (c) Exhibits:

            99   Press Release


                                   SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of the security Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

        Dated: December 30, 1998

                                        FRONTIER FINANCIAL CORPORATION



                                        By: /s/ ROBERT J. DICKSON
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Robert J. Dickson
                                            Chief Executive Officer



                                        2
# C_2016098EN.01006001.xml

| 14.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/60

---

Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Premo v OHIM — Prema Semiconductor (PREMO)

(Case T-400/14) (1)

1

(2016/C 098/76)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.

1

---
# C_2014303EN.01001701.xml

| 8.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Romania) lodged on 6 June 2014 — SC Enterprise Focused Solutions SRL v Spitalul Județean de Urgență Alba Iulia

(Case C-278/14)

2014/C 303/22

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: SC Enterprise Focused Solutions SRL

Appellant:

Respondent: Spitalul Județean de Urgență Alba Iulia

Respondent:

Question referred

Question referred

May Article 23(8) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 (1) be interpreted as meaning that, when a contracting authority defines the technical specifications of the product which is the subject of a procurement contract by reference to a particular brand, the characteristics of the ‘equivalent’ product offered must be established solely by reference to the technical specifications of products still in production, or may they be established by reference to products which are on the market but no longer in production?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).

1

---
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1


                             WEBLINK WIRELESS, INC.
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                 (IN THOUSANDS)
                                   (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                       THREE MONTHS
                                   YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED      ENDED       YEAR ENDED
                                  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,
                                      1994          1995          1996          1997          1998 (1)      1999          1999
                                  ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------ -------------  ------------
<S>                               <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>          <C>            <C>
Earnings:
  Net loss ......................   $(45,813)     $(53,113)     $(48,598)     $(43,887)     $(59,316)     $(25,073)     $(99,867)
  Add: Amount of
     previously capitalized
     interest amortized .........         --            --            --            --           252           572         2,288
  Add: Fixed charges ............     12,933        30,720        35,041        38,499        43,798        17,133        65,310
                                    --------      --------      --------      --------      --------      --------      --------
  Adjusted earnings .............    (32,880)      (22,393)      (13,557)       (5,388)      (15,266)       (7,368)      (32,269)

Fixed charges:
  Interest in
     indebtedness ...............     11,209        28,383        32,368        36,672        52,645        16,607        63,452
  Amortization of debt
     issuance costs .............        800         1,052         2,143           844         1,172           331         1,291
  Interest portion
     of rental and
     lease expense ..............        924         1,285           530           983         1,428           195           567
                                    --------      --------      --------      --------      --------      --------      --------
  Fixed charges .................     12,933        30,720        35,041        38,499        55,245        17,133        65,310

Deficiency of
  earnings available to
  cover fixed charges ...........   $(45,813)     $(53,113)     $(48,598)     $(43,887)     $(70,511)     $(24,501)     $(97,579)
                                    ========      ========      ========      ========      ========      ========      ========

Earnings to fixed charges ratio           --            --            --            --            --            --            --
</TABLE>

(1)  The fixed charge adjustment to earnings excludes $11.4 million of
     capitalized interest for the year ended December 31, 1998.
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.1500 Malic dehydrogenase test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A malic dehydrogenase test system is a device that is intended to measure the activity of the enzyme malic dehydrogenase in serum and plasma. Malic dehydrogenase measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of muscle and liver diseases, myocardial infarctions, cancer, and blood disorders such as myelogenous (produced in the bone marrow) leukemia.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 862.9.
[52 FR 16122, May 1, 1987, as amended at 65 FR 2307, Jan. 14, 2000]
§ 520.2220d Sulfadimethoxine bolus. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each bolus contains 2.5, 5, or 15 grams sulfadimethoxine.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.640 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use in cattle* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer 2.5 grams per 100 pounds body weight for 1 day followed by 1.25 grams per 100 pounds body weight per day; treat for 4 to 5 days.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of shipping fever complex and bacterial pneumonia associated with *Pasteurella* spp. sensitive to sulfadimethoxine; and calf diphtheria and foot rot associated with *Fusobacterium necrophorum* sensitive to sulfadimethoxine.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Do not administer within 7 days of slaughter. Milk that has been taken from animals during treatment and 60 hours (five milkings) after the latest treatment must not be used for food. A withdrawal period has not been established for this product in preruminating calves. Do not use in calves to be processed for veal. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[79 FR 28829, May 20, 2014, as amended at 88 FR 16547, Mar. 20, 2023]