alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.23


Exhibit 10.23




[Letterhead of Penthouse Media Group, Inc.]

November 9, 2007

VIA E-MAIL

URGENT REPLY REQUESTED

Mr. Russell H. Frye

121 Centre St., Unit PH1

Brookline, MA  02446

Dear Mr. Frye:

Re:

Penthouse Media Group Inc. (“PMGI”) Series B Offering

I write to update you concerning the PMGI Series B Convertible Preferred Offering (the “Offering”). You will recall that in connection with the Offering, you deposited your purchase money funds with Moses & Singer LLP, as escrow agent, pursuant to that certain Securities Purchase Agreement and Escrow Agreement, PMGI now intends to complete the Offering by drawing funds from the escrow, causing the Series B shares to be issued to you, and causing any overpayment remaining from your purchase money funds to be refunded to you.

Because the Securities Purchase Agreement and Escrow Agreement originally contemplated that the escrow account would liquidate and close by September 30, 2007, the escrow agent has asked for your written confirmation that you consent to the escrow agent releasing to PMGI the entire amount of funds or portion thereof to be applied to your purchase of Series B Convertible Preferred shares.

Please also confirm that you consent to PMGI amending the Securities Purchase Agreement and the Escrow Agreement as reasonably necessary to permit PMGI to complete, and you to participate, in the Offering, including without limitation

·

extending the September 30, 2007 deadline set forth in the Securities Purchase Agreement (Sections 2.2 and 2.3) and the Escrow Agreement (the first WHEREAS clause, and Section 3.1(b)) to November 30, 2007; and

·

extending the October 1, 2007 date set forth in the Escrow Agreement (Section 3.1(d)) to December 1, 2007.

Finally, please confirm that you hereby waive the Securities Purchase Agreement Section 5.1(e) closing condition (i.e., that “the Company shall have delivered the stock certificates to the Escrow Agent in accordance with Section 2.2”), and acknowledge that PMGI will issue the stock certificates in due course, but not later than December 15, 2007.

Please indicate your consent to all of the foregoing points by signing and dating a copy of this letter and returning it to me via facsimile or e-mail.

Please call me if you have any questions.

Cordially,

PENTHOUSE MEDIA GROUP INC.

/s/ Joshua R. Bressler                       

Joshua R. Bressler

General Counsel

ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED

RUSSELL H. FRYE

/s/ Russel H. Frye 11/9/07
Premanufacture Notice (PMN) for P-06-0153

A pubic copy of the sanitized PMN for these substances is not 

available.

For further information on obtaining a copy of this document 

contact:

Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,

Environmental Protection Agency,

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460-0001

Telephone: 202-564-9232

Email: Moss.Kenneth@epa.gov
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 National Science Foundation
 In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting. *Name:*
                         Special Emphasis Panel in Information and Intelligent Systems (#1200). Dates of 
                                 meetings
LocationsJune 1-2, 2000
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.June 5-6, 2000
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
 *Type of Meeting:*
                         Closed. *Contact Persons:*
                         Michael Lesk and Richard Hilderbrandt, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, Room 1115, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone: (703) 306-1930. *Minutes:*
                         May be obtained from the contact person listed above. *Purpose of Meeting:*
                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support. *Agenda:*
                         To review and evaluate Information Technology Research (ITR) proposals submitted to the Information Technology Research Program as part of the selection process for awards. *Reason for Closing:*
                         The proposals being reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in Sunshine Act. Dated: May 12, 2000. Karen J. York, Committee Management Officer.


[FR Doc. 00-12450  Filed 5-17-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### CLARK v STUDEBAKER CORPORATION et

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No. 9710.

Decided August 2, 1929

Messrs. Arthur P. Gustafson and Louis Fernberg, Cleveland, for Clark.

Messrs. Henderson, Quail, McGraw & Morgan, Cleveland, for Studebaker Corporation et.

WILLIAMS, J.

Even though there is no evidence in the record tending, to prove either that Fisher bought the car or was the agent of both of the defendants at the time of its sale, yet these facts are not vital. The mortgage by its terms gave the mortgagee the right to take possession of the mortgaged car and sell it at private sale without notice, and also provided that the mortgagee could become the purchaser at such sale. It follows that if the mortgagee or an agent of the mortgagee, or any one else, bought it at such sale, the sale would be valid and the purchaser would get. a good title. It does not follow, however, that the mortgagor would have no remedy against the mortgagee. The sale being valid, cannot be set aside, and obviously an action for an accounting could bring, no results in the instant case.

The plaintiff below sought her remedy by way of damages.. There is evidence in the record tending to show that, the property was sold by the Studebaker Corporation, which had taken back the notes and mortgage from the Industrial Acceptance Corporation, for much less than half of its market value at the time of the sale and for about a third . of the price for which it had been sold six months before, and that the Studebaker Corporation at the time of the sale knew that the plaintiff had paid about one-half the purchase price and had funds with which to pay all notes that had matured according to their terms, and was endeavoring to raise the money to meet the whole indebtedness.

If the facts in this case are not sufficient to warrant the submission of the cause to the jury, then in every case in which a mortgage provides for repossession of mortgaged property and sale of the same at private sale without notice to the mortgagtor, the mortgagor is wholly at the mercy of the mortgagee.

We are still of the opinion that the court erred in directing a verdict and that the question whether the sale was made fairly, openly and in good faith should have been submitted to the jury. Application for rehearing denied.

Lloyd and Richards, JJ, concur.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-20-00016-CR

EDGAR FLORES-GARNICA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from

County Criminal Court No. 5

of Denton County (CR-2018-06700-E)

May 13, 2021

Opinion by Justice Wallach

(p)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Mike Wallach___________________

 Justice Mike Wallach
13252

#### HALSEY v. MINNESOTA-SOUTH CAROLINA LAND & TIMBER COMPANY *ET AL.*

(160 S. E., 843)

*282*Messrs. Mitchell & Horlbeck, H. L. Prckmann*and /. *C.*Long, for appellant,

*Messrs. Lide & McCandlish, Legare Walker, Thomas P. Stoney*and *J. D. P. Meyer,*for respondent,

*283October 6, 1931.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

This is an action for damages in the sum of $79,490.00 ($64,490.00 actual damages and $15,000.00 punitive damages), sustained by the plaintiff by reason of certain false representations as to the amount of timber on certain tracts in Orangeburg County. The plaintiff alleges that in December, 1923, the defendants represented to him that there were 19,000,000 feet of timber upon the two tracts, and that the agreed price was based on this representation, which was falsely and fraudulently made; that it developed that there were only 12,652,194 feet of timber; including culls and defective wood, about 10,000,000 feet of first-class merchantable timber.

• The plaintiff offered evidence to sustain the allegations of his complaint and that the cutting was done in a proper manner; the defendants offered evidence tending to show that the quantity of represented timber was there when sold, but that it had been wasted and carelessly cut; the plaintiff offered evidence to disprove this, but was not allowed to do so; the plaintiff put up no testimony in reply, and, upon motion of the defendants, his Honor directed a verdict in their favor.

The presiding Judge was technically right in holding that after the plaintiff had gone into evidence tending to show that the timber was properly cut, and was followed by evidence on the part of the defendants to the contrary, the plaintiff having gone into the subject should not be allowed to offer evidence in reply; but, in directing a verdict for the defendants, he appears to have assumed the truth of the evidence offered by the defendants that the timber had been improperly cut.

We think that the manner in which the timber was cut was an important issue in the case which should have been submitted to the jury, and that it was error on the part of the presiding Judge to direct a verdict for the defendants.

*284The judgment of this Court is that the judgment of the Circuit Court be reversed, and that the case be remanded to that Court for a new trial.

Mr. Chief Justice Brease and Messrs. Justices Stabrer and Carter concur.
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0394 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0394

**98/394/EC: Commission Decision of 29 May 1998 amending Decision 97/252/EC drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorise imports of milk and milk products for human consumption (notified under document number C(1998) 1412) (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 176 , 20/06/1998 P. 0028 - 0029 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 29 May 1998 amending Decision 97/252/EC drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorise imports of milk and milk products for human consumption (notified under document number C(1998) 1412) (Text with EEA relevance) (98/394/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 95/408/EC of 22 June 1995 on the conditions for drawing up, for an interim period, provisional lists of third country establishments from which Member States are authorised to import certain products of animal origin, fishery products or live bivalve molluscs (1), as amended by Decision 97/34/EC (2), and in particular Article 2(4) thereof,

Whereas Commission Decision 95/340/EC (3), as last amended by Decision 96/584/EC (4), determines the countries from which Member States are to authorise imports of milk and milk-based products;

Whereas health and veterinary certification requirements for imports of milk and milk-based products from the countries on that list were set by Commission Decision 95/343/EC (5), as last amended by Decision 97/115/EC (6);

Whereas Commission Decision 97/252/EC (7), as last amended by Decision 98/89/EC (8), determines provisional lists of third country establishments from which Member States are to authorise imports of milk and milk products for human consumption;

Whereas the Commission has received lists of estabishments from South Africa with guarantees that they meet the appropriate Community health requirements and that should an establishment fail to do so its exports to the Community may be suspended;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 97/252/EC is supplemented by the Annex to this Decision covering South Africa.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 29 May 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 243, 11. 10. 1995, p. 17.

(2) OJ L 13, 16. 1. 1997, p. 33.

(3) OJ L 200, 24. 8. 1995, p. 38.

(4) OJ L 255, 9. 10. 1996, p. 20.

(5) OJ L 200, 24. 8. 1995, p. 52.

(6) OJ L 42, 13. 2. 1997, p. 16.

(7) OJ L 101, 18. 4. 1997, p. 46.

(8) OJ L 17, 22. 1. 1998, p. 33.

ANEXO - BILAG - ANHANG - ÐÁÑÁÑÔÇÌÁ - ANNEX - ANNEXE - ALLEGATO - BIJLAGE - ANEXO - LIITE - BILAGA

>TABLE>
# EUR-Lex - 31999R1478 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31999R1478

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1478/1999 of 6 July 1999 fixing the final amount of aid for dried fodder for the 1998/99 marketing year **

*
Official Journal L 171 , 07/07/1999 P. 0008 - 0008 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1478/1999

of 6 July 1999

fixing the final amount of aid for dried fodder for the 1998/99 marketing year

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 603/95 of 21 February 1995 on the common organisation of the market in dried fodder(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1347/95(2), and in particular Article 18 thereof,

(1) Whereas Article 3(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 603/95 fix the amounts of aid to be paid to processors for dehydrated fodder and sun-dried fodder produced during the 1998/99 marketing year up to the maximum guaranteed quantities laid down in Article 4(1) and (3) of that Regulation;

(2) Whereas the information forwarded to the Commission by the Member States under the second indent of Article 15(a) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 785/95 of 6 April 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 603/95 on the common organisation of the market in dried fodder(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 676/1999(4), indicates that the maximum guaranteed quantity for dehydrated fodder has been exceeded, and that the maximum guaranteed quantity for sun-dried fodder has not been exceeded;

(3) Whereas it should therefore be laid down that the aid provided for in Regulation (EC) No 603/95 for dehydrated fodder should be reduced in accordance with Article 5 of that Regulation; whereas the aid for sun-dried fodder should be paid to recipients in full;

(4) Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Dried Fodder,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The aid for dehydrated fodder and sun-dried fodder provided for in Article 3(2) and (3) respectively of Regulation (EC) No 603/95 shall be paid as follows for the 1998/99 marketing year:

(a) the aid for dehydrated fodder shall be reduced to EUR 65,88 per tonne in all Member States;

(b) the aid for sun-dried fodder shall be paid in full.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 6 July 1999.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 63, 21.3.1995, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 131, 15.6.1995, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 79, 7.4.1995, p. 5.

(4) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 40.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 93 (Friday, May 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12045]



[[Page 30612]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation 
(``POSC'')

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 25, 1999, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Petrotechnical Open 
Software Corporation (``POSC'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership status. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, PIDX Petroleum 
Industry Data Exchange, Findlay, OH has been added as a party to this 
venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Petrotechnical Open Software 
Corporation (``POSC'') intends to file additional written notification 
disclosing all changes in membership.
    On January 14, 1991, Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation 
(``POSC'') filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of 
the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal 
Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on February 7, 1991 (56 FR 
5021).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on August 3, 
1999. A notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 00-12045 Filed 5-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as adopted), I, Susan Santage, Chief Executive
Officer and  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies
that, to the best of his or her knowledge:





1.
The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010
and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the "PERIODIC
REPORT") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the
period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company
for the period covered by the Periodic Report.





Dated:
May 10, 2010








S/Susan Santage


Susan
Santage


CEO &
CFO





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Yummies, Inc. and will be retained by Yummies, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request





THIS
CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SS. 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED "FILED" BY THE COMPANY FOR PURPOSES OF
SECTION 18 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.
§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: ( a ) A source of light with its power supply independent of the main lighting system must be installed to— ( 1 ) Illuminate each passenger emergency exit marking and locating sign; and
( 2 ) Provide enough general lighting in the passenger cabin so that the average illumination, when measured at 40-inch intervals at seat armrest height on the center line of the main passenger aisle, is at least 0.05 foot-candle.
( b ) Exterior emergency lighting must be provided at each emergency exit. The illumination may not be less than 0.05 foot-candle (measured normal to the direction of incident light) for minimum width on the ground surface, with landing gear extended, equal to the width of the emergency exit where an evacuee is likely to make first contact with the ground outside the cabin. The exterior emergency lighting may be provided by either interior or exterior sources with light intensity measurements made with the emergency exits open.
( c ) Each light required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this section must be operable manually from the cockpit station and from a point in the passenger compartment that is readily accessible. The cockpit control device must have an “on,” “off,” and “armed” position so that when turned on at the cockpit or passenger compartment station or when armed at the cockpit station, the emergency lights will either illuminate or remain illuminated upon interruption of the rotorcraft's normal electric power.
( d ) Any means required to assist the occupants in descending to the ground must be illuminated so that the erected assist means is visible from the rotorcraft. ( 1 ) The assist means must be provided with an illumination of not less than 0.03 foot-candle (measured normal to the direction of the incident light) at the ground end of the erected assist means where an evacuee using the established escape route would normally make first contact with the ground, with the rotorcraft in each of the attitudes corresponding to the collapse of one or more legs of the landing gear.
( 2 ) If the emergency lighting subsystem illuminating the assist means is independent of the rotorcraft's main emergency lighting system, it— ( i ) Must automatically be activated when the assist means is erected;
( ii ) Must provide the illumination required by paragraph (d)(1); and
( iii ) May not be adversely affected by stowage.
( e ) The energy supply to each emergency lighting unit must provide the required level of illumination for at least 10 minutes at the critical ambient conditions after an emergency landing.
( f ) If storage batteries are used as the energy supply for the emergency lighting system, they may be recharged from the rotorcraft's main electrical power system provided the charging circuit is designed to preclude inadvertent battery discharge into charging circuit faults.
[Amdt. 29-24, 49 FR 44438, Nov. 6, 1984]
#### § 1471.955 Indictment.

*Indictment* means an indictment for a criminal offense. A presentment, information, or other filing by a competent authority charging a criminal offense shall be given the same effect as an indictment.