alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PH06/166988.1
Exhibit 10.5
                                
                            AMENDMENT
                                
                                
     THIS AMENDMENT, dated as of November 12, 1998, is between
Players International, Inc. (together with its successors or
assigns, the "Company") and Patrick Madamba, Jr. ("Executive").

                      W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive are parties to an
Agreement dated as of March 31, 1997, as amended by Amendment
dated as of August 31, 1998 (the "Agreement"), and the Company
and Executive now wish to amend the Agreement.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual
covenants contained herein and for other good and valuable
consideration, the Company and Executive agree as follows:

     1.         Paragraph 2(b) is amended in its entirety to read as
       follows:
          
               (b)  The Term of Employment shall commence on the
          date hereof and shall, unless sooner terminated as
          provided in Paragraph 9 or unless extended by the
          Company in its sole discretion, terminate on the close
          of business on January 22, 2000; provided that if a
          Change in Control of the Company occurs during the term
          of this Agreement, the Term of Employment shall
          automatically continue in effect for a period of 24
          months beyond the month in which such Change in Control
          occurs.

     2.         The introductory clause of Paragraph 9(d) (ending with
       the word "Control" in line 7 thereof) is amended in its entirety
       to read as follows:

               (d)  Termination Upon a Change in Control.  In the
          event (A) a Termination Upon a Change in Control occurs
          within 24 months following the month in which the
          Change in Control occurs, (B) Executive is terminated
          within six months prior to a Change in Control, by the
          Company without Cause (which shall not include a
          termination pursuant to Paragraph 9(a)) or by Executive
          in the event of a Constructive Termination Without
          Cause, or (C) Executive is terminated within six months
          prior to a Change in Control as a result of expiration
          of this Agreement, Executive shall be entitled to
          receive (taking into account any benefits provided
          under subparagraph (c)), promptly following the later
          of his termination of employment or the Change in
          Control:..."

     3.         In all respects not amended, the Agreement is hereby
       ratified and confirmed.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this
Amendment as of the date first above written.

                                       PLAYERS INTERNATIONAL,INC.


                                       __________________________
                                       Howard A. Goldberg
                                       Chief Executive Officer




                                       ___________________________
                                       Patrick Madamba, Jr.
230414 ORDER RE CMECF MAINTENANCE PERIOD VERSION APRIL 14, 2023 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

----------------------------------------------------------x

In re: PROMESA

Title III

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

as representative of No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, (Jointly Administered)

et al.,

Debtors.1

----------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR FILINGS ON

APRIL 20-24, 2023, IN LIGHT OF CM/ECF UNAVAILABILITY

The Court has been notified that the CM/ECF system hosting the PROMESA 

Title III cases and adversary proceedings will be shut down to perform system upgrades

beginning on Thursday, April 20, 2023, at 7:00 p.m. (Atlantic Standard Time) until Monday, 

April 24, 2023, at 8:00 a.m. (Atlantic Standard Time) (the “CM/ECF Unavailability Period”). 

Parties are directed to email any emergency pleadings during the CM/ECF Unavailability Period

to SwainDPRCorresp@nysd.uscourts.gov. Such email must be copied to all opposing parties. 

1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case 

number and the last four (4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as 

applicable, are the (i) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3283-

LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing 

Corporation (“COFINA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of 

Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority 

(“HTA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 

3808); (iv) Employees Retirement System of the Government of the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of 

Federal Tax ID: 9686); (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (“PREPA”) 

(Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3747); and 

(vi) Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority (“PBA”) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax 

ID: 3801) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3801) (Bankruptcy Case No. 19-BK5523-LTS). (Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to 

software limitations).

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23996 Filed:04/14/23 Entered:04/14/23 11:49:27 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
230414 ORDER RE CMECF MAINTENANCE PERIOD VERSION APRIL 14, 2023 2

Parties are further instructed to file any such pleadings on the CM/ECF system as soon as 

practicable following the conclusion of the CM/ECF Unavailability Period.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 14, 2023

 /s/ Laura Taylor Swain 

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN

United States District Judge

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23996 Filed:04/14/23 Entered:04/14/23 11:49:27 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
#### DEBORAH McDWIRE v. JOHN McDWIRE.

Divorce — condonation or forgiveness.

The condonation or forgiveness of an injury by husband or wife prevents that injury from being afterwards urged as a cause of divorce.

Divorce. Cause, extreme cruelty.

The parties have been married eleven years, and have four children. They have separated several times. He drinks to excess, and treats her cruelly. Once when she was sick he left her without assistance and stayed away all night. He drank up all they had and left her again without any provision and- stayed a week. *355They had a rupture, and she went to a neighbor’s; he followed with the child, laid it down, clenched her, struck at her, but was caught. She then went to her father’s and they lived together again. At a neighbor’s he once knocked her off a chair, she run and he followed and beat her until she was taken up and laid away nearly dead. He then swore she was not dead, but he would cut her throat; he drew a knife across her throat and *scarred*it, and a woman that was by snatched it. They afterwards lived together again.

Br the Court.

It has been uniformly' decided, that where the parties have themselves forgiven the injuiy and been reconciled, it makes no ground for divorce. There is, no cruelty proven since the reconciliation. Bill dismissed.
#### WOMELDORF *v.*STEINBERGEN.

Struck jury — peremptory challenge — division of the court.

Qttere — Whether, when a-j my has been struck,the right of peremptory challenge to a juror is not thereby taken away.

Where the judges are equally divided in opinion, the motion before the court fails.

Assumpsit. In this case, a jury was struck, under the statute, and sixteen persons were returned upon the panel. Twelve of these were called into the box.

Brazee, for the defendant,

challenged one of the twelve peremptorily, and eited 29 *O. L.*78.

*Allen*and Murphy, contra,

insisted that in cases of struck jury, the right of peremptory challenge was taken away. The first twelve must be sworn.

*Brazee*

moved for a new trial. A case was made and reserved for the Court in Bank.

Collett, J.

was of opinion that the challenge could not be received.

Wright, J.

was in favor of admitting it.

Owing to this division of opinion, the challenge was not received, and the juror was sworn.

A verdict was taken for the plaintiff for $227 36.

In the Court in Bank, at December Term, 1832, the case was argued.

Judges Hitchcock and Wright were of opinion the challenge was admissible.

Judges Collett and Lane were of opinion it was inadmissible.

Owing to this division, the motion for a new trial failed, and judgment was rendered for the plaintiff on the verdict.
§ 117.9 Fatigue education and awareness training program. ( a ) Each certificate holder must develop and implement an education and awareness training program, approved by the Administrator. This program must provide annual education and awareness training to all employees of the certificate holder responsible for administering the provisions of this rule including flightcrew members, dispatchers, individuals directly involved in the scheduling of flightcrew members, individuals directly involved in operational control, and any employee providing direct management oversight of those areas.
( b ) The fatigue education and awareness training program must be designed to increase awareness of: ( 1 ) Fatigue;
( 2 ) The effects of fatigue on pilots; and
( 3 ) Fatigue countermeasures
( c ) ( 1 ) Each certificate holder must update its fatigue education and awareness training program every two years and submit the update to the Administrator for review and acceptance.
( 2 ) Not later than 12 months after the date of submission of the fatigue education and awareness training program required by (c)(1) of this section, the Administrator shall review and accept or reject the update. If the Administrator rejects an update, the Administrator shall provide suggested modifications for resubmission of the update.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3301 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3301

    To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to 
encourage the implementation or expansion of pre-kindergarten programs 
                for students 4 years of age or younger.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 15, 2003

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to 
encourage the implementation or expansion of pre-kindergarten programs 
                for students 4 years of age or younger.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Universal Pre-Kindergarten and Early 
Childhood Education Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. USE OF COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTER FUNDS FOR PRE-KINDERGARTEN 
              PROGRAMS.

    Section 4205 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
(20 U.S.C. 7175) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
            (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
    ``(b) Pre-Kindergarten Programs.--
            ``(1) Authorization.--In addition to the activities 
        authorized under subsection (a), a local educational agency 
        that receives an award under this part may use the award for 
        educational activities for children 4 years of age or younger 
        if the agency agrees to phase in, where possible, a pre-
        kindergarten program.
            ``(2) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
        term `pre-kindergarten program' means a program that--
                    ``(A) provides a pre-kindergarten curriculum in 
                classrooms at public elementary schools for students 4 
                years of age or younger; and
                    ``(B) is taught by teachers who possess equivalent 
                or similar qualifications to those of teachers of other 
                grades in the school involved.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Anderson *v.*The State.

*Murder.*

(Decided May 12, 1914.

65 South. 262.)

*Jury; Venire; Motion to Quash; Evidence.*— In the absence of a bill of exceptions this court cannot review the trial court’s action in overruling the motion to quash the venire, as the matter not properly presented.

*67Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.

Heard before Hon. William E. Fort.

Henry Anderson was convicted of murder' and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Gibson & Davis, for appellant. No brief reached the Reporter.

R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and T. I-I. Seat, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

The record contains no bill of exceptions, and the motion to quash the venire is not *reviewable.*— McCain *Bros. v.*Street, 136 Ala. 25.

WALKER, P. J.

As the record in this case contains no bill of exceptions, the ruling made by the court on the defendant’s motion to quash the venire is not presented for *review.*— McCain *Bros. v.*Street, 136 Ala. 625, 33 South. 872. The record proper shows a compliance with the requirements of law applicable to the case of a person indicted for a capital felony, and there is no error in it.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1


                    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 Quarterly Report of Epolin, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2005,
as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the
"Report"),  the  undersigned certifies,  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley  Act  of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's  knowledge,
that:

      (1)   The  Report  fully complies with the requirements  of
Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act  of  1934;
and

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


Dated: January 11, 2006            By:/s/ Murray S. Cohen
                                   Murray S. Cohen,
                                   Chairman of the Board
                                   (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: January 11, 2006            By:/s/ James Ivchenko
                                   James Ivchenko,
                                   President (Principal Financial
                                   Officer)
§ 791.15 Requests for open meeting. ( a ) Following any announcement that the Board intends to close a meeting or any portion of any meeting, any person may make a written request to the Secretary of the Board that the meeting or a portion of the meeting be open. The request shall be circulated to the members of the Board, and the Board, upon the request of one member, shall reconsider its action under § 791.14 before the meeting or before discussion of the matter at the meeting. If the Board decides to open a portion of a meeting proposed to be closed, the Board shall publicly announce its decision in accordance with § 791.13(e). If no request is received from a Board member to reconsider the decision to close a meeting or portion thereof prior to the meeting discussion, the Chairman of the Board shall certify that the Board did not receive a request to reconsider its decision to close the discussion of the matter.
( b ) The request to open a portion of a meeting shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board in advance of the meeting in question. The request shall set forth the requestor's interest in the matter to be discussed and the reasons why the requestor believes that the public interest requires that the meeting or portions thereof be open to public observation.
( c ) The submission of a request to open a portion of a meeting shall not act to stay the effectiveness of Board action or to postpone or delay the meeting unless the Board decides otherwise.
( d ) The Secretary of the Board shall advise the requestor of the Board's consideration of the request to open a portion of the meeting as soon as practicable.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3583 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3583

     To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish an 
independent panel to assess the homeland security needs of the National 
                            Capital Region.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 21, 2003

  Mr. Bartlett of Maryland (for himself, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Gilchrest, Mr. 
 Cardin, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Van Hollen, Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, Ms. 
Norton, Mr. Goode, Mr. Ruppersberger, and Mr. Cummings) introduced the 
following bill; which was referred to the Select Committee on Homeland 
                                Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish an 
independent panel to assess the homeland security needs of the National 
                            Capital Region.

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

SECTION 1. HOMELAND SECURITY NEEDS OF NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION.

    (a) Establishment of Independent Panel.--The Secretary of Homeland 
Security shall establish an independent panel to assess the homeland 
security needs of the National Capital Region.
    (b) Duties of Panel.--The panel shall--
            (1) evaluate the definition of National Capital Region used 
        by the Department of Homeland Security to determine whether the 
        definition should be modified to include additional areas, 
        including jurisdictions in the States of Maryland and Virginia 
        along Interstate Routes 270, 95, and 66;
            (2) determine whether jurisdictions in the States of 
        Maryland and Virginia along Interstate Routes 270, 95, and 66 
        should be taking actions to prepare for the possibility of a 
        terrorist attack in the National Capital Region, including the 
        construction of facilities to accommodate the needs of the 
        National Capital Region in the event of a terrorist attack; and
            (3) if the panel determines under paragraph (2) that 
        actions should be taken by jurisdictions along Interstate 
        Routes 270, 95, and 66, make recommendations for appropriate 
        funding to permit the actions to be taken as expeditiously as 
        possible.
    (c) Composition of Panel.--The panel shall include representatives 
of the jurisdictions that comprise the National Capital Region and the 
jurisdictions to be considered for inclusion in the National Capital 
Region under subsection (b)(1).
    (d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
the first meeting of the panel, the panel shall transmit to the 
Secretary and Congress a report containing the recommendations of the 
panel.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal C 261/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.261.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 261 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5530 August 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.261.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 261

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5530 August 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 261/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6657 — Marubeni Corporation/Gavilon Holdings) (1) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2012/C 261/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6657 — Marubeni Corporation/Gavilon Holdings) (1)

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 261/02 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2012/C 261/02

Euro exchange rates

2

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
MEMORANDUM

DATE: December 1, 2014

TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket ID: OAR-2013-0602

FROM: Rob Lawrence

EPA/Region 6/PD

SUBJECT: September 17, 2014 Call with New Mexico Bernalillo County / City of 

Albuquerque Regarding the Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power 

Plants

SUMMARY

A conference call was made by EPA to New Mexico Bernalillo County / City of 

Albuquerque on September 17, 2014, to discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing 

Power Plants, which was proposed on June 2, 2014. 

ATTENDEES

Participant: Margaret Nieto, Bernalillo County

EPA Participants Terry Johnson and John Walser
# C_2023035EN.01000101.xml

| 30.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2023/C 35/01)

Last publication

OJ C 24, 23.1.2023

Past publications

OJ C 15, 16.1.2023

OJ C 7, 9.1.2023

OJ C 482, 19.12.2022

OJ C 472, 12.12.2022

OJ C 463, 5.12.2022

OJ C 451, 28.11.2022

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
§ 120.203 General. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this subpart is to establish programs designed to help prevent accidents and injuries resulting from the misuse of alcohol by employees who perform safety-sensitive functions in aviation.
( b ) *Alcohol testing procedures.* Each employer shall ensure that all alcohol testing conducted pursuant to this subpart complies with the procedures set forth in 49 CFR part 40. The provisions of 49 CFR part 40 that address alcohol testing are made applicable to employers by this subpart.
( c ) *Employer responsibility.* As an employer, you are responsible for all actions of your officials, representatives, and service agents in carrying out the requirements of the DOT agency regulations.