alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SEVENTHCAI INC
                          4300 N. MILLER RD. SUITE 120
                         SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251-3620

February 7, 2000

Carl P. Ranno Esq.
2816 East Windrose Drive
Phoenix, Arizona 85032

     Re:  Lock-Up Agreement with Seventhcai, Inc.

Gentlemen,

     In consideration of the sale to the holder by Seventhcai,  Inc.,  (Company)
of its Common  Stock  ($.0001  par  value),  the  undersigned  holder  warrants,
covenants and agrees for the benefit of the Company not to sell,  offer to sell,
solicit an offer to buy, contract to sell, make any short sale,  pledge,  grant,
grant any option to purchase, or otherwise transfer or dispose of, any shares of
Common stock, or any securities  convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable
for Common Stock,  owned  directly or  beneficially  by the  undersigned or with
respect  to which  the  undersigned  has the  power of  disposition,  except  in
connection  with or following a completed  merger or  acquisition by the Company
and the Company is no longer  classified  as a blank check  company  pursuant to
Section 7 (b) (3) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

     An attempt to sell, transfer or any type of disposition of the shares shall
be a violation of this letter  agreement and shall be  ineffective  and null and
void.

     In  furtherance  of the  foregoing,  the holder agrees to; (1) delivery his
shares to the  Company  for safe  keeping;  (2) allow the  Company to advise its
Transfer Agent not to transfer said  securities and (3) authorize the company to
deliver a copy of this  Agreement to the  transfer  agent with  instructions  to
decline to make any transfer of securities if such transfer  would  constitute a
violation or breach of this Agreement.

     This  Agreement  shall be  binding  upon the  holder,  its  agents,  heirs,
successors, assignees and beneficiaries.
<PAGE>
     A waiver of the terms and  conditions of this  agreement must be in writing
and executed by the proper officer of the Company and the holder.

     If there is a breach or  threatened  breach of this  Agreement,  the holder
agrees  that  there is no  adequate  remedy at law and said  breach  will  cause
irreparable damage. Accordingly,  the holder agrees that the Company is entitled
to the issuance of an immediate injunction without notice to restrain the breach
or  threatened  breach.  This remedy is not exclusive and the holder agrees that
the  Company  and third  party  beneficiaries  shall be  entitled  to seek other
remedies including a claim for other remedies, including money damages.

     THE HOLDER

/s/ Carl P. Ranno
-----------------
Carl P. Ranno.                         Constituting 10,000 shares certificate(s)

                                                             #
                                                              ------------------
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3121 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3121

            To override the income tax treaty with Barbados.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 2003

 Mr. McInnis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To override the income tax treaty with Barbados.

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

SECTION 1. OVERRIDE OF INCOME TAX TREATY WITH BARBADOS.

    (a) In General.--The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied 
without regard to the Convention between the United States of America 
and Barbados for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of 
Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income signed on December 31, 
1984.
    (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall apply--
            (1) in the case of United States taxes withheld at source, 
        to amounts paid or credited after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act, and
            (2) in the case of other United States taxes, to taxable 
        years ending after such date.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.1

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 Thomas Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John R. Hamann, President and Chief Executive Officer 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:



/s/
John R. Hamann
President and Chief Executive Officer
April 15, 2003

---

QuickLinks
Filed 8/1/19 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2019 ND 208

In the Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Steven T. Rosso, a Person Previously

Admitted to the Bar of the State of North Dakota

No. 20190191

Recommendation for Reciprocal Discipline.

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

Per Curiam.

[¶1] On June 18, 2019, the North Dakota Disciplinary Board notified the Supreme

Court under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(D) that it was recommending the reciprocal

discipline of Steven T. Rosso. The record reflects that the Minnesota Supreme Court

suspended Rosso for 12 months for failing to safeguard client funds; failing to ensure

accurate maintenance of the required trust account books and records; failing to

review the activity in the pooled and individual client trust accounts or any of the

reports generated for those accounts; failing to adequately supervise non-lawyer staff

in the handling of client funds, which resulted in the misappropriation of client funds;

failing to promptly disburse funds to clients; negligent misappropriation of client

funds; and accepting an improper personal loan from a client. The Minnesota

Supreme Court conditioned reinstatement on successful completion of the Multistate

Professional Responsibility Examination and compliance with continuing legal

education requirements.
[¶2] Rosso was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on October 5, 1994, and

was licensed until December 31, 2017. Rosso did not pay his license fee for 2018 and

was listed with the State Board of Law Examiners as retired starting January 23, 2018.

[¶3] On January 17, 2019, the North Dakota Disciplinary Board served notice under

N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.4(B) that a certified copy of an order of suspension was

entered by the Minnesota Supreme Court was received. The notice informed Rosso

he had 30 days to file any claim that imposition of the identical discipline in North

Dakota would be unwarranted and the reasons for the claim. No response was

received from Rosso. On June 18, 2019, the Disciplinary Board filed its

recommendation that Rosso be suspended for 12 months, with reinstatement

conditioned on completion of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination

and compliance with continuing legal education requirements.

[¶4] The Court considered the matter, and

[¶5] ORDERED, that Steven T. Rosso is SUSPENDED from the practice of law

in North Dakota for 12 months, effective upon entry of judgment in this matter.

[¶6] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Rosso must comply with N.D.R. Lawyer

Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice.

[¶7] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that reinstatement is governed by N.D.R.

Lawyer Discipl. 4.5 and is conditional upon on successful completion of the

Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination and compliance with continuing

legal education requirements.

[¶8] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Jerod E. Tufte

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jon J. Jensen

2
# C_2020332EN.01000601.xml

| 8.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 332/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 332/6

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2020/C 332/06)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following State aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 26 June 2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 85 319 |
| Decision No | 067/20/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Title | COVID-19 Direct grant scheme to traders of package travels |
| Legal basis | The legal basis of the measure is the Parliamentary Decision authorising the measure (1). The terms and conditions for the grants will be set out in a letter of assignment and term sheet issued by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries to Innovation Norway. |
| Type of measure | Grant scheme |
| Objective | The objective of the measure is to: (i) ensure that sufficient liquidity remains available for traders in the package travel market, in order to counter the damage inflicted on impacted undertakings; (ii) ensure the quickest possible settlement of refunds or reimbursements to package travellers; and (iii) preserve the continuity of economic activity during and after the COVID-19 outbreak. |
| Budget | NOK 500 million |
| Duration | 26.6.2020–31.12.2020 |
| Economic sectors | Package travel |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Innovation Norway |
| Akersgata 13 |
| 0104 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

26 June 2020

Case No

85 319

Decision No

067/20/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Title

COVID-19 Direct grant scheme to traders of package travels

Legal basis

The legal basis of the measure is the Parliamentary Decision authorising the measure (1). The terms and conditions for the grants will be set out in a letter of assignment and term sheet issued by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries to Innovation Norway.

Type of measure

Grant scheme

Objective

The objective of the measure is to: (i) ensure that sufficient liquidity remains available for traders in the package travel market, in order to counter the damage inflicted on impacted undertakings; (ii) ensure the quickest possible settlement of refunds or reimbursements to package travellers; and (iii) preserve the continuity of economic activity during and after the COVID-19 outbreak.

Budget

NOK 500 million

Duration

26.6.2020–31.12.2020

Economic sectors

Package travel

Name and address of the granting authority

Innovation Norway

Akersgata 13

0104 Oslo

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---

(1)  https://stortinget.no/no/Saker-og-publikasjoner/Vedtak/Vedtak/Sak/?p=79784

---
Exhibit 10.26
 
 EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 Bell Microproducts Inc., William E. Meyer,
 RECITALS:
   AGREEMENTS:
 Employment Duties
 Term of Employment




---



##### 



Compensation
  Base Salary
 Incentive Bonus Compensation
 Business Expenses
 Employee Benefits
 Automobile Allowance
 Financial Planning/Tax Preparation Allowance
 -2-




---



##### 



Stock Option Grant
 Noncompetition
    Confidential Information
 -3-




---



##### 



Work Product and Inventions
   Exempt Inventions
  Copyrights
 -4-




---



##### 



Return of Property
 Injunctive Relief
 Death or Inability to Perform Job Duties
   Termination of Executives Employment by the Company for Cause
 -5-




---



##### 



Termination of Executives Employment by the Company Without Cause
 Termination of Employment by Executive
 Severability and Interpretation
 -6-




---



##### 



Survival
 Notices
 (a)
    
    CompanyRichard J. Jacquet
Bell Microproducts Inc.
1941 Ringwood Avenue
San Jose, CA 95131-1721
Facsimile (408) 467-2760(b)     Executive:William E. Meyer[Redacted]
   Amendments
 Governing Law
 Waiver by the Company
 -7-




---



##### 



Successors and Assigns
  BELL MICROPRODUCTS INC.By:
    / Richard J. JacquetIts:  Senior Vice President, Human Resources/s/ William E. MeyerExecutive8/6/07Date -8-
§ 210.47 Federal Reserve Bank liability; payment of compensation. ( a ) *Damages.* In connection with its handling of a payment order under this subpart, a Federal Reserve Bank shall not be liable to a sender, receiving bank, beneficiary, or other Federal Reserve Bank, governed by this subpart, for any damages other than those payable under Article 4A. A Federal Reserve Bank shall not agree to be liable to a sender, receiving bank, beneficiary, or other Federal Reserve Bank for consequential damages under section 4A-305(d) of Article 4A.
( b ) *Payment of compensation.* ( 1 ) A Federal Reserve Bank shall satisfy its obligation, or that of another Federal Reserve Bank, to pay compensation in the form of interest under Article 4A by paying such compensation to a sender, receiving bank, beneficiary, or another party to the funds transfer that is entitled to such payment in an amount that is calculated in accordance with section 4A-506 of Article 4A.
( 2 ) If the sender or receiving bank that is the recipient of the payment of compensation is not the party entitled to compensation under Article 4A, the sender or receiving bank shall pass through the benefit of the compensation by making an interest payment, as of the day the compensation was paid by the Federal Reserve Bank, to the party entitled to compensation. The interest payment that is made to the party entitled to compensation shall not be less than the value of the compensation that was paid by the Federal Reserve Bank to the sender or receiving bank. The party entitled to compensation may agree to accept compensation in a form other than a direct interest payment, provided that such an alternative form of compensation is not less than the value of the interest payment that otherwise would be made.
( c ) *Nonwaiver of right of recovery.* Nothing in this subpart or any operating circular issued hereunder shall constitute, or be construed as constituting, a waiver by a Federal Reserve Bank of a cause of action for recovery under any applicable law of mistake and restitution.
42606.

#### MOBLEY v. THE STATE.

Bell, Presiding Judge.

1. The evidence authorized the jury’s general verdict of guilty on the two-count accusation of possessing and selling nontax-paid alcoholic beverages. Sufficient identification and continuity of possession was shown by the State with respect to its Exhibits 1 and 2. The trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for new trial on the general grounds or in admitting in evidence the State’s Exhibits 1 and 2.

2. Although the court in its instructions to the jury did not specifically recite that the defendant was charged in 2 counts but referred only to the substance of Count 2 of the accusation, nevertheless the court instructed that the jury would “have this accusation and warrant which it is based upon out with you. It is not evidence and it is not to be considered by you as evidence, but you are authorized to look to it for a better statement of the contentions of the State.” When considered in its entirety, the court’s charge, in absence *756of requests, was adequate. It covered the issues in the case and was not confusing or misleading to the jury. The mere failure of the court to recite the contents of Count 1 of the accusation (the possession charge), if erroneous, was harmless.

*Jordan and Pannell, JJ., concur.*

Submitted February 7, 1967 —

Decided April 18, 1967

Rehearing denied May 22, 1967.

*Sumner & Boatright, J. Laddie Boatright,*for appellant.

*Elie L. Holton, Solicitor,*for appellee.

The court will not consider arguments in the brief which do not relate to the enumeration of errors.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# EUR-Lex - E1995C0018 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# E1995C0018

**EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 18/95/COL of 17 March 1995 amending for the first time the Rules of Procedure of the EFTA Surveillance Authority **

*
Official Journal L 125 , 08/06/1995 P. 0025 - 0025 *

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 18/95/COL of 17 March 1995 amending for the first time the Rules of Procedure of the EFTA Surveillance Authority

THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,

Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (Surveillance and Court Agreement), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

Whereas on 1 January 1995 the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden acceded to the European Union;

Whereas certain adjustments have therefore been made to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, as provided for in the Agreement adjusting certain agreements between the EFTA States (1);

Whereas, however, the Surveillance and Court Agreement, as worded prior to these adjustments, shall, during a transitional period, continue to apply to certain activities of the Surveillance Authority, as provided for in the Agreement on transitional arrangements for a period after the accession of certain EFTA States to the European Union (2);

Whereas, according to Article 19 of the Agreement adjusting certain agreements between the EFTA States, the Surveillance Authority is to make such adaptations to its Rules of Procedure as are rendered necessary by that Agreement,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

1. In Articles 8 and 13 and in paragraph 4 of Article 14 of the Rules of Procedure of the EFTA Surveillance Authority (3) 'three` shall be replaced by 'two`.

2. This Decision shall enter into force on 17 March 1995. The amendments to the Rules of Procedure provided for in the Decision shall not apply to activities of the Surveillance Authority carried out in accordance with the Agreement on transitional arrangements for a period after the accession of certain States to the European Union.

3. This Decision, which is authentic in the English language, shall be published in the EEA Section of and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 17 March 1995.

For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

The President

Knut ALMESTAD

(1) Done in Brussels on 29 December 1994.

(2) Done in Brussels on 28 September 1994.

(3) Decision No 1/94/COL (OJ No L 113, 4. 5. 1994, p. 19, EEA Supplement No 6, 4. 5. 1994, p. 1.)
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3167 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3167

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 48 South Broadway in Nyack, New York, as the ``Edward O'Grady, 
           Waverly Brown, Peter Paige Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 24, 2003

Mr. Engel (for himself, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. King of New York, Mrs. McCarthy 
 of New York, Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Bishop of New York, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. 
  McNulty, and Mr. Houghton) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 48 South Broadway in Nyack, New York, as the ``Edward O'Grady, 
           Waverly Brown, Peter Paige Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 48 South Broadway in Nyack, New York, and known as the Nyack 
Post Office, shall be known as the ``Edward O'Grady, Waverly Brown, 
Peter Paige Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Edward 
O'Grady, Waverly Brown, Peter Paige Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
§ 1410.4 Payment of premiums. ( a ) *Payments.* Each insured bank shall pay to the Corporation the amount of the premium due to the Corporation computed in accordance with sections 5.55 and 5.56 of the Act, and § 1410.3 of this part, and shown on its certified statement, at the time the statement is filed. Certified statements shall be considered to have been filed and payments made in a timely manner if they are received on or before January 31 following the end of the calendar year on which the certified statement is based.
( b ) *Premiums as obligations of insured banks.* Premiums required to be paid by § 1410.3 are obligations of the insured banks, and are to be paid at the times required by this section, regardless of whether the insured bank has assessed and collected any assessments under section 1.12 of the Act.
[56 FR 3201, Jan. 29, 1991; 56 FR 10302, Mar. 11, 1991; 74 FR 17374, Apr. 15, 2009]
§ 16.18 Use of prospectus. ( a ) No person shall use a prospectus or amendment declared effective by the OCC more than nine months after the effective date unless the information contained in the prospectus or amendment is as of a date not more than 16 months prior to the date of use.
( b ) If any event arises, or change in fact occurs, after the effective date and that event or change in fact, individually or in the aggregate, results in the prospectus containing any untrue statement of material fact, or omitting to state a material fact necessary in order to make statements made in the prospectus not misleading under the circumstances, then no person shall use the prospectus that has been declared effective under this part until an amendment reflecting the event or change has been filed with and declared effective by the OCC.
# C_2007111EN.01002101.xml

| 17.5.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 111/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.5.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/21

---

Authorisation of State aid pursuant to Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement

EFTA Surveillance Authority decision not to raise objections

(2007/C 111/09)

Date of adoption:

EFTA State: Norway

Aid No: Case 60867

Title: Regional risk-loan scheme

Objective: The principal objective of the scheme is to promote economic development in disadvantaged regions by providing undertakings an incentive to invest in the regions covered by the scheme.

Legal basis: Act of 19 December 2003 No 130 on Innovation Norway (Lov av 19. desember 2003 nr 130 om Innovasjon Norge), draft Regulation on investment aid etc (Forskrift om geografisk virkeområde og bruk av dei regional- og distriktspolitiske verkemidla).

Lov av 19. desember 2003 nr 130 om Innovasjon Norge

Forskrift om geografisk virkeområde og bruk av dei regional- og distriktspolitiske verkemidla

Budget/ Duration: The yearly budget of the scheme is approximately NOK 100 million (approximately EUR 13 million). The scheme is notified for the duration of the Regional Aid Guidelines, from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013.

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://www.eftasurv.int/fieldsofwork/fieldstateaid/stateaidregistry

---