alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.19



THIS AGREEMENT is made of the 20th day of October 2003

BETWEEN:

Jason McDiarmid., businessman, of 1839 LaRonde Drive, Surrey, B. C.
("McDiarmid");

AND

Essential Innovations Technology Corp., a Nevada corporation with an office at
114 West Magnolia Street, Suite 400-142, Bellingham, WA 98225 ("EITC")

WHEREAS:

EITC is engaged in the business of developing certain proprietary geo thermal
products.

McDiarmid is the President and Chief Executive Officer of EITC

NOW IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows:

1.       Interpretation

         1.1      In this Agreement:

                  i)       "Agreement" means this document and any and all
                           Schedules to this Agreement, as amended, modified or
                           supplemented from time to time in accordance with
                           these provisions;

2.       Loan:

         2.1      McDiarmid agrees to lend EITC US $10,000.00 with terms and
                  conditions as per Schedule "A"

         2.2      EITC agrees to repay the loan in full, together with unpaid
                  interest when demanded by McDiarmid

3.       Notice

         3.1      All notices required or permitted hereunder shall be in
                  writing and shall be transmitted by hand or by post to the
                  parties addressed to the addresses given at the head of this
                  Agreement, or such other address as the parties may designate
                  in writing.

4.       Miscellaneous

         4.1      If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be
                  invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and
                  enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement
                  shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

         4.2      The clause headings in this Agreement are inserted for
                  convenience only and should be ignored in construing this
                  Agreement.

         4.3.     No change in, or addition to, the terms of this Agreement
                  shall be valid unless in writing and signed by the parties
                  hereto.

         4.4      This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
                  accordance with the laws of the State of Nevada.

The Recitals and Schedules hereto form part of this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement the day
and year first above written.

/s/ Jason McDiarmid
----------------------
Jason McDiarmid

For and on behalf of

Essential Innovations Technology Corp.

/s/ Kenneth Telford
---------------------------------
Kenneth Telford, CFO & Secretary

<PAGE>

                                   SCHEDULE A
                   LOAN OF US $10,000.00 from Jason McDiarmid
                    To Essential Innovations Technology Corp


Date of loan:     October 20, 2003

Term:             Due on Demand, demand will not be made for repayment prior to
                  March 31, 2004

Interest:         9%, calculated monthly, payable monthly

Security:         Unsecured

Initials:         JM       /s/ JM
                  EITC     /s/ KT
§ 4.63 Loss of use of hand or foot. Loss of use of a hand or a foot, for the purpose of special monthly compensation, will be held to exist when no effective function remains other than that which would be equally well served by an amputation stump at the site of election below elbow or knee with use of a suitable prosthetic appliance. The determination will be made on the basis of the actual remaining function of the hand or foot, whether the acts of grasping, manipulation, etc., in the case of the hand, or of balance and propulsion, etc., in the case of the foot, could be accomplished equally well by an amputation stump with prosthesis. ( a ) Extremely unfavorable complete ankylosis of the knee, or complete ankylosis of 2 major joints of an extremity, or shortening of the lower extremity of 31 ⁄ 2 inches (8.9 cms.) or more, will be taken as loss of use of the hand or foot involved.
( b ) Complete paralysis of the external popliteal nerve (common peroneal) and consequent, footdrop, accompanied by characteristic organic changes including trophic and circulatory disturbances and other concomitants confirmatory of complete paralysis of this nerve, will be taken as loss of use of the foot.
[29 FR 6718, May 22, 1964, as amended at 43 FR 45349, Oct. 2, 1978]
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2418 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2418

  For the relief of Rafael Camacho, Rosa B. Camacho, and Rosa Camacho.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2007

  Ms. Waters introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  For the relief of Rafael Camacho, Rosa B. Camacho, and Rosa Camacho.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR RAFAEL CAMACHO, ROSA B. 
              CAMACHO, AND ROSA CAMACHO.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Rafael Camacho, Rosa B. 
Camacho, and Rosa Camacho shall each be eligible for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully 
admitted for permanent residence upon filing an application for 
issuance of an immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for 
adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Rafael Camacho, Rosa B. Camacho, or 
Rosa Camacho enters the United States before the filing deadline 
specified in subsection (c), he or she shall be considered to have 
entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be 
eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Rafael Camacho, Rosa B. 
Camacho, and Rosa Camacho, the Secretary of State shall instruct the 
proper officer to reduce by 3, during the current or next following 
fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under section 
203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the 
total number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of 
the country of the aliens' birth under section 202(e) of such Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Edward Rode et al., Respondents, *v.*David Auerbach et al., Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan.

Leslie, Minor & Bliss, for appellants.

Hays, Greenbaum & Hershfield, for respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

From the evidence it appears that July 20, 1897, was the time fixed for the completion of the work, and that time was of the essence of the contract. As no waiver of this *766time provision was alleged none could be shown. Elting v. Dayton, 17 N. Y. Supp. 849.

If, however, it be assumed that a waiver of strict performance as to time could be shown, evidence of performance within a reasonable time would be necessary and there is no evidence as to the time of the completion of the work.

The only witness, Edward Rode, who testified as to completion, did not state the time. The record discloses no merit in the plaintiffs’ claim.

The judgment should be reversed, with costs to appellants to abide the event.

Present: Tbuax, P. J., Scott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment reversed, with costs to appellants to abide event.
#### § 17.40 Additional services for indigents.

In addition to the usual medical services agreed upon between the governments of the United States and the Republic of the Philippines to be made available to patients for whom the Department of Veterans Affairs has authorized care at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center, any such patient determined by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to be indigent or without funds may be furnished toilet articles and barber services, including haircutting and shaving necessary for hygienic reasons.

[33 FR 5299, Apr. 3, 1968, as amended at 47 FR 58247, Dec. 30, 1982. Redesignated at 61 FR 21965, May 13, 1996]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-51136

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS DANIEL ORTIZ-ORTIZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:09-CR-260-1

Before WIENER, PRADO and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Jesus Daniel Ortiz-Ortiz appeals the 46-month within-guidelines sentence

imposed following his guilty plea to illegal reentry following deportation in

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Ortiz argues that his sentence is unreasonable

because his sentence is the result of impermissible double counting, does not

reflect that his current illegal reentry conviction is not a crime of violence and

posed no danger to others, and does not reflect that he illegally reentered

because he needed work to support his family. Ortiz also argues that this court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 12, 2010

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: 09-51136 Document: 00511292324 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/12/2010
No. 09-51136

should not afford his sentence a presumption of reasonableness because U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2 is not empirically based.

Ortiz’s challenge to the presumption of reasonableness is foreclosed.

See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 366-67 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 130 S. Ct. 192 (2009). We have also rejected the argument that using a

prior conviction to increase the offense level and in calculating criminal history

is impermissible “double counting.” See United States v. Calbat, 266 F.3d 358,

364 (5th Cir. 2001).

Ortiz has not rebutted the presumption that the district court sentenced

him to a reasonable, properly calculated within-guidelines sentence. See United

States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 129 S.

Ct. 328 (2008); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55 (5th Cir. 2006).

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 09-51136 Document: 00511292324 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/12/2010
§ 20.107 Rule 107. Disqualification of Members. ( a ) *General.* A Member of the Board will disqualify himself or herself in a hearing or decision on an appeal if that appeal involves a determination in which he or she participated or had supervisory responsibility in the agency of original jurisdiction prior to his or her appointment as a Member of the Board, or where there are other circumstances which might give the impression of bias either for or against the appellant. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7102, 7104)
( b ) *Disqualification of Members by the Chairman.* The Chairman of the Board, on his or her own motion, may disqualify a Member from acting in an appeal on the grounds set forth in paragraph (a) of this section and in those cases where a Member is unable or unwilling to act.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7102, 7104, 7106)
[57 FR 4104, Feb. 3, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 20449, May 7, 1996. Redesignated at 84 FR 177, Jan. 18, 2019, as amended at 84 FR 4337, Feb. 15, 2019]
NUMBER 13-24-00225-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

LAURIE G. SIMMONS, Appellant,

v.

PORTFOLIO RECOVERY 

ASSOCIATES, LLC ASSIGNEE OF 

FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A. (MBNA) Appellee.

 

ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1

OF CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Tijerina and Peña 

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

This matter is before the Court on appellant’s correspondence dated May 24, 2024 

requesting the notice of appeal to be withdrawn which we construe as a motion to dismiss.

It appears the parties have reached an agreement, and appellant wishes to withdraw or 

dismiss her appeal. 
2

Having considered appellant’s motion to dismiss, we are of the opinion that the 

motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Therefore, appellant’s motion 

to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby dismissed. Costs will be taxed against the 

appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs 

against the appellant.”). Because the appeal is dismissed at the appellant’s request, no 

motion for rehearing will be entertained.

DORI CONTRERAS

Chief Justice

Delivered and filed on the

28th day of August, 2024.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 10, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 10, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16I0140. ATLANTIC SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. NANCY LEWIS et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

15CV1205
#### Isaac Kubie, Respondent, *v.*Miller Brothers & Co., Defendants, Alexander B. Smith, Receiver of Miller Brothers & Co., Appellant.

Appeal from an order denying upon reargument a motion made by the receiver of the defendants to vacate a - judgment entered herein by default in favor of the plaintiff on January 26, 1898.

Stiefel & Lauer (Edgar J. Bauer, of counsel), for appellant.

Einstein & Townsend (M. S. Guiterman, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Guriam.*

Order appealed from affirmed, with ten dollars costs.

Present: Eitzsimons, Oh. J., and O’Dwyer, J.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Candela Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, F.Paul Broyer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| Date:  May 9, 2005 | /s/ F.  Paul Broyer |   |
|-------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                    | F. Paul  Broyer          |
|                    | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
AFS-11-350-E

July 29, 2013

 Exemption No. 8593D

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2002-12993

Ms. Kathleen A. Yodice

Counsel 

Stallion 51 Corporation

411 Aviation Way, Suite 245

Frederick, MD 21701

Dear Ms. Yodice:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption 

No. 8593, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated June 22, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Stallion 51 Corporation (Stallion 51), for an extension of Exemption No. 8593, as 

amended. That exemption from § 91.315 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)

allows Stallion 51 to provide initial and recurrent training and training under contract with the 

U.S. military in its two North American TF-51 (TF-51) airplanes certificated as limited 

category civil aircraft. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Stallion 51. 

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8593, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 
2

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the conditions and 

limitations below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Stallion 51 must continue to maintain its TF-51 aircraft in an airworthy condition in 

accordance with—

a. The maintenance requirements specified in the TF-51 aircraft type 

specification sheet, as amended;

b. An inspection program that meets the requirements of § 91.409; and

c. Appropriate military technical manuals for the TF-51 aircraft.

2. The pilot in command (PIC) must—

a. Hold at least a commercial pilot certificate with a single-engine land airplane 

rating;

b. Hold at least a second-class medical certificate;

c. Hold a certificated flight instructor certificate with an airplane single-engine 

rating;

d. Have completed TF-51 aircraft qualification and recurrent flight and ground 

training within the previous 12 calendar months; and

e. Have accomplished three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop in a TF-51 

aircraft within the previous 90 days before serving as PIC.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8593, as amended, to 

July 31, 2015, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John M. Allen

Director, Flight Standards Service
# Official Journal L 441/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 441 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 649 December 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 441

English edition

Legislation

Volume 649 December 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/2174 of 3 December 2021 on unresolved objections regarding the terms and conditions of the authorisation of the biocidal product Konservan P40 in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  (notified under document C(2021) 8686)

   (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| | | ACTS ADOPTED BY BODIES CREATED BY INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS |
| | * | Decision No 3/2021 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors of 26 November 2021 to amend Decision No 3/2019 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors to adopt transitional measures pursuant to Article 95(4) of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement [2021/2175] | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

*

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/2174 of 3 December 2021 on unresolved objections regarding the terms and conditions of the authorisation of the biocidal product Konservan P40 in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  (notified under document C(2021) 8686)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2021) 8686)

1

1

ACTS ADOPTED BY BODIES CREATED BY INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

*

Decision No 3/2021 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors of 26 November 2021 to amend Decision No 3/2019 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors to adopt transitional measures pursuant to Article 95(4) of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement [2021/2175]

3

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
§ 39.3 Priority list. ( a ) The priority groups, with Priority Group 1 having the highest priority and Priority Group 4 the lowest priority, are: ( 1 ) *Priority Group 1* —Projects needed to avoid disruption in burial service that would otherwise occur at existing veterans cemeteries within 4 years of the date of the preapplication. Such projects would include expansion projects as well as improvement projects (such as construction of additional or replacement facilities) when such improvements are required to continue interment operations.
( 2 ) *Priority Group 2* —Projects for the establishment of new veterans cemeteries.
( 3 ) *Priority Group 3* —Expansion projects at existing veterans cemeteries when a disruption in burial service due to the exhaustion of existing gravesites is not expected to occur within 4 years of the date of the preapplication.
( 4 ) *Priority Group 4* —Improvement projects for cemetery landscaping or infrastructure, such as building expansion and upgrades to roads and irrigation systems, that are not directly related to the development of new gravesites. Operation and Maintenance Projects that address NCA's national shrine standards of appearance are included in this group.
( b ) Within Priority Groups 1, 2, and 3, highest priority will be given to projects in geographical locations with the greatest number of veterans who will benefit from the project as determined by VA. This prioritization system, based on veteran population data, will assist VA in maintaining and improving access to burial in a veterans cemetery to more veterans and their eligible family members. Within Priority Group 1, at the discretion of VA, higher priority may be given to a project that must be funded that fiscal year to avoid disruption in burial service.
( c ) Grants for projects within Priority Group 4 will be awarded in any fiscal year only after grants for all project applications under Priority Groups 1, 2, and 3 that are ready for funding have been awarded. Within Priority Group 4, projects will be ranked in priority order based upon VA's determination of the relative importance of proposed improvements and the degree to which proposed Operation and Maintenance Projects achieve NCA national shrine standards of appearance. No more than $10 million in any fiscal year will be awarded for Operation and Maintenance Projects under Priority Group 4.
( d ) By October 1 of each year, VA will make a list prioritizing all preapplications that were received on or before July 1 of that year and that were approved under § 39.31 or § 39.81, ranking them in their order of priority within the applicable Priority Group for funding during the fiscal year. Preapplications from previous years will be re-prioritized each year and do not need to be resubmitted.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2408)
[75 FR 34005, June 16, 2010, as amended at 87 FR 80461, Dec. 30, 2022]