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



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CEO AS REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14 or 15d-14 OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHAGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Zap.Com Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
    /s/ Avram A. GlazerAvram A. GlazerPresident and CEO
 15
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications. Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. (Historicalpurposes)
**Title:****Treaties in force [electronicresource] : a list of treaties and other international acts of the UnitedStates in force on ..**** 
SuDoc:S 9.14:
Item Number:0900-A-02 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000639193
 
Current
 
1997 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004
2005:Bilateral | Multilateral
2006:BilateralAlphabetical | Bilateral| MultilateralAlphabetical | Multilateral
2007:Bilateral| Multilateral
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014| 2015 | 2016 | 2017| 2019
2020
 **
Exhibit 10.3


 


[FinTech Acquisition Corp. III Letterhead]


 


August 3, 2020


 


Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.

499 Park Avenue


New York, New York 10022


 


		Re:	Deferred Underwriting Commission



 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


Reference is made to that certain underwriting agreement (the
“Underwriting Agreement”), dated as of November 15, 2018, by and among FinTech Acquisition Corp. III
(the “Company”) and Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., as representative of the several underwriters named
therein (the “Representative”). Terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings given to such
terms in the Underwriting Agreement.


 


The parties hereto acknowledge that the Company has executed
a non-binding term sheet (“Term Sheet”) with GTCR-Ultra Holdings II, LLC (“Holdings”)
relating to a potential business combination between Holdings and the Company (the “Proposed Transaction”).
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Underwriting Agreement, each of the Company and the Representative agree that the
Deferred Underwriting Commission payable upon the consummation Company’s initial Business Combination shall be reduced to
an aggregate amount of six million dollars ($6,000,000), contingent upon: (x) the consummation of the Proposed Transaction; and
(y) the Representative being named as placement agent in connection with the PIPE investments contemplated by the Term Sheet. The
Company and the Representative further agree that, upon execution of definitive documentation relating to the Proposed Transaction,
the parties hereto shall promptly prepare and execute such agreements as may be appropriate and customary to set forth the terms
and conditions of the arrangements contemplated hereby.


 


For the avoidance of doubt, neither the Company nor the Representative
shall have any obligations hereunder in the event that definitive documentation relating to the Proposed Transaction is not executed.


 


Holdings shall be an express third party beneficiary of this
agreement, and shall be entitled to enforce all rights of the Company hereunder. This agreement may not be amended or modified
without the consent of the Company, the Representative and Holdings. The Representative is making this agreement on its own behalf
and on behalf of the Underwriters.


 


[Signature page follows]


 






     


     


    

 


If the foregoing correctly sets forth the understanding between
the Representative and the Company, please so indicate in the space provided below for that purpose, whereupon this letter shall
constitute a binding agreement between us.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	FINTECH ACQUISITION CORP. III
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Daniel G. Cohen
	 	Name: 	Daniel G. Cohen
	 	Title:  	Chief Executive Officer


 


	Accepted on the date first above written:	 
	 	 
	CANTOR FITZGERALD & CO.	 
	 	 
	By:	 /s/ Bala Murty	 
	Name: 	Bala Murty	 
	Title:  	COO, IB
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 21

- 00004

- CR

The State of Texas, Appellant

v.

Jordan Craig Wetz, Appellee

FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. CR2013

- 564, THE HONORABLE DIB WALDRIP, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The State of Texas filed a notice of appeal from the district court ’ s order granting

appellee Jordan Craig Wetz ’ s motion to terminate his probation. The State has now filed a

motion to dismiss its appeal, representing that the district court has withdrawn its order . We

grant the motion and dismiss the State ’ s appeal.

__________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana , Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Smith

Filed: January 29, 2021

Do Not Publish
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5080 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5080

       To repeal the Postal Service monopoly on first class mail.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 1994

 Mr. Cox introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to 
   the Committees on Post Office and Civil Service and the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To repeal the Postal Service monopoly on first class mail.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS

    (a) The Postal Service is responding to increasing competition from 
telecommunications services, electronic mail, fax, computer modems, 
cellular technology, overnight delivery, and other market competition 
by seeking a legally-granted price increase for its monopoly business 
of so-called ``first class'' mail.
    (b) The normal market response to increased competition is price 
reductions, not price increases.
    (c) The magnitude of the price increase being sought by the Postal 
Service is over 10 percent.
    (d) The hoary arguments against robust competition in the mails 
have been thoroughly disproved (for example, while the Postal Service 
claims rural delivery could be curtailed as a result of increased 
competition, it presently refuses to deliver to many addresses in the 
United States; whereas United Parcel Service even now delivers to every 
address in the United States).
    (e) Ending the abusive legal monopoly conferred on the Postal 
Service by the so-called ``private express statutes'' will improve 
consumer choice and reduce prices.

SEC. 2. MONOPOLY REPEALED

    (a) In General.--Chapter 6 of title 39, United States Code, and 
sections 1693 through 1699 of title 18, United States Code, the 
provisions of law effectively granting the Postal Service a monopoly on 
first class mail, commonly referred to as the ``private express 
statutes,'' are repealed.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Title 39, united states code.--The item relating to 
        chapter 6 in the table of chapters for part I of title 39, 
        United States Code, is repealed.
            (2) Title 18, united states code.--The items relating to 
        sections 1693 through 1699, respectively, in the table of 
        sections for chapter 83 of title 18, United States Code, are 
        repealed.
                                 <all>
```
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. L. B. HOSIERY CO., Incorporated, and Lee Maisel, Doing Business as Myerstown Hosiery Mills, Respondents.

No. 10362.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued Feb. 21, 1951.

Decided March 1, 1951.

Franklin C. Milliken, Washington, D. C., Julian E. Goldberg, Philadelphia, Pa. (George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. General Counsel, and Samuel M. Singer, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, all of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for American Federation of Hosiery Workers, for petitioner.

No argument *by*respondents.

Before McLAUGHLIN, KALODNER and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce an order rendered against the respondents. An examination of the record shows that the Board’s conclusions are based upon substantial evidence and that the terms of the Board’s order are responsive to the facts found.

The petition for enforcement will, therefore, be granted and a form of decree may be submitted.
#### § 29.70 When do I need a temporary access permit?

You must apply to the Service and obtain a temporary access permit to access your proposed area of operations in order to conduct reconnaissance surveys within a refuge. This permit will describe the means, routes, timing, and other terms and conditions of your access determined by the Service to result in only the minimum disturbance necessary to perform surveys.
§ 217.153 Prohibitions. Notwithstanding takings contemplated in § 217.152 and authorized by the LOAs issued under §§ 216.106 of this chapter and 217.156, no person in connection with the activities described in § 217.150 may: ( a ) Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and requirements of this subpart or an LOA issued under §§ 216.106 of this chapter and 217.156;
( b ) Take any marine mammal not specified in such LOAs;
( c ) Take any marine mammal specified in such LOAs in any manner other than as specified;
( d ) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOAs if NMFS determines such taking results in more than a negligible impact on the species or stocks of such marine mammal; or
( e ) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOAs if NMFS determines such taking results in an unmitigable adverse impact on the species or stock of such marine mammal for taking for subsistence uses.
Exhibit
10.3


ESPP
AMENDMENT


FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE ON
ASSIGNMENT, INC. EMPLOYEE STOCK

PURCHASE PLAN,


AS AMENDED AND RESTATED
JUNE 18, 2002


Pursuant to the
authority reserved to the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of On
Assignment, Inc., a Delaware Company (the “Company”), under Section 9.2
of the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as Amended and Restated on June
18, 2002 (the “ESPP”), the Board hereby amends the Plan as follows (the “ESPP
Amendment”):


1.               The first sentence of Section 1.2 of the
ESPP is deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:


“The aggregate number of shares of Stock
authorized to be sold pursuant to Options granted under the plan is 400,000,
subject to adjustment as provided in this Section.”


The remainder of Section 1.2 shall not be
affected by this amendment.


2.               Section 2.11 of the ESPP is deleted and
replaced in its entirety with the following:


“2.11               ‘Employer’
means the Company and all Affiliates that are specified on Schedule A to the
Plan and that have adopted the Plan, as such Schedule A may be revised by the
Committee from time to time.”


3.               Section 3.1 of the ESPP is deleted and
replaced in its entirety with the following:


“3.1                 General Requirements.  Subject to Section 3.2 below, each Employee
of each Employer is eligible to participate in the Plan for a given Offering
Period if, prior to an applicable Grant Date, (a) such Employee has completed
thirty days of continuous employment with one or more Employers, (b) such
Employee is in the employ of an Employer on the Grant Date, (c) such Employee
completes a valid payroll deduction form authorizing payroll deductions and
files it with such Employee’s Employer or such other person as may be
designated by the Committee prior to the Grant Date, and (d) such Employee’s customary
employment service is for more than twenty hours per week and more than five
months per calendar year.











Except as
expressly provided in this ESPP Amendment, all terms and conditions of the ESPP
and any awards outstanding thereunder shall remain in full force and effect.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board
has caused this ESPP Amendment to be executed by a duly authorized officer of
the Company as of the 23rd day of January, 2007.


	
  On Assignment, Inc.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ James Brill

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  James Brill

  
	
   

  	
  Senior Vice President, Finance

  
	
   

  	
  Chief Financial Officer

  
	
   

  	
  Secretary & Treasurer
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 7784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03101]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 9942-42-OA]

Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC); Notice of Charter 
Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) has determined that, in accordance with the provisions of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, the Local 
Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) is a necessary committee which is 
in the public interest. Accordingly, LGAC will be renewed for an 
additional two-year period. The purpose of LGAC is to provide advice 
and recommendations to EPA's Administrator on ways to improve its 
partnership with Local Governments and provide more efficient and 
effective environmental protection.
    Inquiries may be directed to Frances Eargle, Designated Federal 
Officer, LGAC, U.S. EPA, (Mail Code 1301A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20460, or eargle.frances@epa.gov.

     Dated: February 4, 2016.
Nichole Distefano,
Associate Administrator, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental 
Relations.
[FR Doc. 2016-03101 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
#### § 87.299 Scope of service.

The use of flight test stations is restricted to the transmission of necessary information or instructions relating directly to tests of aircraft or components thereof.
# EUR-Lex - 11957A107D - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11957A107D

**TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY - ARTICLE 107D **

*
Official Journal C 191 , 29/07/1992 P. 0051 *

Article 107d

1. The European Parliament shall appoint an Ombudsman empowered to receive complaints from any citizen of the Union or any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Community institutions or bodies, with the exception of the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance acting in their judicial role.

In accordance with his duties, the Ombudsman shall conduct inquiries for which he finds grounds, either on his own initiative or on the basis of complaints submitted to him direct or through a member of the European Parliament, except where the alleged facts are or have been the subject of legal proceedings. Where the Ombudsman establishes an instance of maladministration, he shall refer the matter to the institution concerned, which shall have a period of three months in which to inform him of its views. The Ombudsman shall then forward a report to the European Parliament and the institution concerned. The person lodging the complaint shall be informed of the outcome of such inquiries.

The Ombudsman shall submit an annual report to the European Parliament on the outcome of his inquiries.

2. The Ombudsman shall be appointed after each election of the European Parliament for the duration of its term of office. The Ombudsman shall be eligible for reappointment.

The Ombudsman may be dismissed by the Court of Justice at the request of the European Parliament if he no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his duties or if he is guilty of serious misconduct.

3. The Ombudsman shall be completely independent in the performance of his duties. In the performance of those duties he shall neither seek nor take instructions from any body. The Ombudsman may not, during his term of office, engage in any other occupation, whether gainful or not.

4. The European Parliament shall, after seeking an opinion from the Commission and with the approval of the Council acting by a qualified majority, lay down the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman's duties.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,480
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   66,713
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,528
<INVENTORY>                                     16,694
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               103,425
<PP&E>                                          73,186
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 236,924
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           67,295
<BONDS>                                        117,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        90,450
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   236,924
<SALES>                                        258,077
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               258,077
<CGS>                                          224,942
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  289,587
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,387
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (42,897)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (890)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (42,007)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (4,264)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (46,271)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.12)


</TABLE>
#### § 73.31 Rounding of nominal power specified on applications.

(a) An application filed with the FCC for a new station or for an increase in power of an existing station shall specify nominal power rounded to two significant figures as follows:

| Nominal power (kW) | Rounded down to nearest figure (kW) |
| --- | --- |
| Below 0.25 | 0.001 |
| 0.25 to 0.99 | 0.01 |
| 1 to 9.9 | 0.1 |
| 10 to 50 | 1 |

(b) In rounding the nominal power in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section the RMS shall be adjusted accordingly. If rounding upward to the nearest figure would result in objectionable interference, the nominal power specified on the application is to be rounded downward to the next nearest figure and the RMS adjusted accordingly.

[50 FR 18821, May 2, 1985, as amended at 53 FR 1031, Jan. 15, 1988]
1

Rios, Gerardo

From: Rios, Gerardo

Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 8:49 AM

To: 'Travis.ritchie@sierraclub.org'

Cc: BECKHAM, LISA; Walters, Julie

Subject: Response to September 3rd Email

Dear Mr. Ritchie, 

Thank you for your email message to EPA Region 9 dated September 3, 2013 in which you requested a meeting with Region 9 to discuss technical 

issues related to the PM BACT analysis for the Pico Pico Energy Center (PPEC). Your message indicated that you would like to provide technical 

information concerning the benefits of an air cooled system rather than a wet tower or a hybrid wet-dry system such as that proposed by the PSD 

applicant for the PPEC. You expressed interest in having Region 9 consider this issue as part of the remand action for the PPEC, while noting that 

your request is not directly related to the appeal proceeding. 

In response, in general, we would welcome the opportunity to discuss with your organization technical information concerning control technology 

developments that you believe may be useful to EPA in considering control technology for natural gas-fired power plants. However, we believe 

that the specific issue you would like to discuss, i.e., cooling tower technology, is not appropriate for further EPA consideration for the PSD permit 

for the PPEC at this time given the posture and status of the PSD permitting decision for this facility. Your email message acknowledges that this 

issue is not directly related to the appeal proceeding, and we believe it is outside the scope of the PM analysis issues that EPA’s Environmental 

Appeals Board (EAB) directed Region 9 to consider on remand. Further, as you are aware, the PSD permit decision for his facility has been in 

process for quite some time, with Region 9 having determined the PSD permit application to be complete as of June 14, 2012. Given the specific 

circumstances surrounding this permit decision, we believe it is appropriate to focus in our remand action solely on the issues that the EAB directed

us to consider. 

We note that EPA Region 9 does not have any complete PSD permit applications under review at this time for natural gas-fired power plants (other 

than the PPEC. However, we would be happy to meet with you at a mutually convenient time in the coming months to discuss the cooling tower 

information you would like to provide, which may be of assistance to us in considering control technology review for other natural gas-fired power 

plants in the future. 

Sincerely, 

Gerardo C. Rios, PE 

2

Chief, Permits Office 

Air Division (Air-3) 

Phone (415) 972-3974 

Fax (415) 947-3579
§ 29.102 How will the Service conduct a formal review? For those applications for which the Service determines that the applicant holds a valid property right, the Service will conduct a formal review of your application by: ( a ) Evaluating the potential impacts of your proposal on Service-administered lands and waters, or resources of refuges; visitor uses or experiences; or visitor or employee health and safety in compliance with applicable Federal laws; and
( b ) Identifying any additional operating conditions that would apply to your approved application.
Case 16-23808 Doc 5 Filed 07/25/16 Entered 07/25/16 16:18:51 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-23808 Doc 5 Filed 07/25/16 Entered 07/25/16 16:18:51 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2