alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 99-40977 -1-

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-40977 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SIDNEY HUNT, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:98-CR-91-1

-------------------- February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Sidney Hunt appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Hunt argues that the district court erred by denying him a three-level downward adjustment in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 (a) & (b). Hunt argues that he is entitled to the adjustment because he took responsibility for his actions by pleading guilty of the offense.No. 99-40977 -2- The defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that he is entitled to the offense level reduction. See United States v. Flucas , 99 F.3d 177, 180 (5th Cir. 1996). “The entry of a guilty plea prior to trial is significant evidence of acceptance of responsibility, but does not entitle the defendant to a reduction as a matter of right.” United States v. Rickett , 89 F.3d 224, 227 (5th Cir. 1996). In determining whether a defendant has accepted responsibility for his crime, the district court should consider whether the defendant has voluntarily terminated or withdrawn from criminal conduct or associations. See id. ; § 3E1.1, comment (n.1(b)). The district court did not err in determining that Hunt was not entitled to the downward adjustment because he failed to withdraw from criminal conduct while he was on bond pending trial. Hunt admitted to using cocaine, submitted two urine samples which tested positive for cocaine, was arrested for and pleaded guilty of possession of drug paraphernalia, and failed to report his arrest to his pretrial services officer. See Flucas , 99 F.3d at 179-80; Rickett , 89 F.3d at 227.
AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 4.8


 


LICENSE AGREEMENT


 


THIS AMENDMENT TO LICENSE AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”)
is made as of August 19, 2015 by and between Dekel Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (the “Licensor” or “Dekel”),
and Therapix Biosciences Ltd., (the “Licensee” or “Therapix”). Licensee, on the one hand,
and Licensor, on the other, may each individually be referred to in this Amendment as a “Party” and collectively
referred to in this Amendment as the “Parties”.


 


WITNESSETH:


 


		WHEREAS	The Parties have each agreed on the terms of the License Agreement signed as of May 20, 2015 (the
“Agreement”); and



		WHEREAS	The Parties desire and
agree to amend the Agreement, as set forth herein;



 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby
agree as follows:


 


		1.	The above recitals are hereby made part of this Amendment.



		2.	Unless expressly provided otherwise, all capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein
shall bear the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.



		3.	Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement, the Parties agree that the completion
of appropriate filings with and obtainment of the required approvals of the TASE with respect to the Upfront Payment’s Ordinary
Shares (as specified under Sec. 2.4 to the Agreement) shall not be considered part of the conditions precedent for the execution,
delivery and performance of the Agreement (as set under said Sec. 2.4 to the Agreement).



		4.	The Parties agree that all conditions and terms of the Agreement are met and that the Agreement
has come into effect as of 19th August, 2015.



		5.	Unless amended hereby, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first above written.


 


[Remainder of page intentionally left
blank]


 






    


     


    

 


[Signature page to Amendment to the
License Agreement between Dekel and Therapix]


 


 


	
        THERAPIX BIOSCIENCES LTD.

         
	 	DEKEL PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.
	 	 	 
	/s/ Elran Haber	 	/s/ Ascher Shmulewitz
	Signature (By)	 	Signature (By)
	 	 	 
	Elran Haber	 	Ascher Shmulewitz
	Name	 	Name
	 	 	 
	VP Business Strategy	 	Chairman
	Title	 	Title
	 	 	 
	August 24, 2015	 	August 24, 2015
	Date	 	Date


 






    -2-
§ 133.40 Evaluation, testing and approval of lifesaving appliances and arrangements. ( a ) Each item of lifesaving equipment required by this part to be carried on board the OSV must be approved.
( b ) Each item of lifesaving equipment carried on board the OSV in addition to those required by this part must— ( 1 ) Be approved; or
( 2 ) Be accepted by the cognizant OCMI for use on the OSV.
( c ) The Commandant (CG-ENG) may accept a novel lifesaving appliance or arrangement if it provides a level of safety equivalent the requirements of this part and if the appliance or arrangement— ( 1 ) Is evaluated and tested in accordance with IMO Resolution A.520(13), Code of Practice for the Evaluation, Testing and Acceptance of Prototype Novel Life-saving Appliances and Arrangements; or
( 2 ) Has successfully undergone evaluation and tests that are substantially equivalent to those recommendations.
( d ) During an OSV's construction, and when any modification to the lifesaving arrangement is done after construction, a OSV owner must obtain acceptance of lifesaving arrangements from the Commandant (Marine Safety Center).
( e ) The OCMI may accept substitute lifesaving appliances other than those required by this part, except for— ( 1 ) Survival craft and rescue boats; and
( 2 ) Survival craft and rescue boat launching and embarkation appliances.
( f ) Acceptance of lifesaving appliances and arrangements will remain in effect unless— ( 1 ) The OCMI deems their condition to be unsatisfactory or unfit for the service intended; or
( 2 ) The OCMI deems the crew's ability to use and assist others in the use of the lifesaving appliances or arrangements to be inadequate.
[CGD 84-069, 61 FR 25304, May 20, 1996, as amended by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009; USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59782, Oct. 1, 2012]
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 12-1418 September Term, 2012

FEC-LRA905

Filed On: October 19, 2012

Gary E. Johnson, et al.,

Petitioners

v.

Federal Election Commission and United

States of America,

Respondents

BEFORE: Henderson, Rogers, and Tatel, Circuit Judges

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the emergency motion for mandatory injunction, writ of

mandamus, or other appropriate relief, it is

ORDERED that the motion be denied. Petitioners have not met the stringent

requirements for the injunctive relief sought, see Washington Metropolitan Area Transit

Comm’n v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841, 843 (D.C. Cir. 1977), or demonstrated a

“clear and indisputable” right to mandamus relief, see Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v.

Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988).

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk 

BY: /s/

Timothy A. Ralls 

Deputy Clerk

USCA Case #12-1418 Document #1400648 Filed: 10/19/2012 Page 1 of 1
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Postal Service Board of Governors

      ( print page 13314)    

## Board Votes To Close March 14, 2007, Meeting

At its teleconference meeting on March 6, 2007, the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service noted unanimously to close to public observation its meeting scheduled for March 14, 2007, in Washington, DC, via teleconference. The Board determined that prior public notice was not possible.

## Item Considered

Postal Regulatory Commission Opinion and Recommended Decision in Docket No. R2006-1, Postal Rate and Fee Changes.

## General Counsel Certification

The General Counsel of the United States Postal Service has certified that the meeting was properly closed under the Government in the Sunshine Act.

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Requests for information about the meeting should be addressed to the Secretary of the Board, Wendy A. Hocking, at (202) 268-4800.                

Wendy A. Hocking,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 07-1395 Filed 3-16-07; 4:50 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-M
Editorial Note on Part 153
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 153 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50465, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 153.935a Storage of cargo samples. ( a ) The master shall make sure that any cargo samples are stored in: ( 1 ) A designated and ventilated space in the cargo area of the vessel; or
( 2 ) An area approved by the Commandant (CG-ENG) or the tankship's flag administration for the stowage of cargo samples.
( b ) The master shall make sure that cargo sample bottles are stored: ( 1 ) In a way that prevents shifting of the sample bottles when the vessel is at sea;
( 2 ) In bins or containers constructed of materials that are resistant to the cargo samples; and
( 3 ) Apart from other sample bottles containing incompatible liquids (See part 150, subpart A).
[CGD 78-128, 47 FR 21211, May 17, 1982, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4782, Feb. 3, 1983]
§ 116.510 Embarkation stations. ( a ) A vessel must have a least two designated embarkation stations on the embarkation deck of each main vertical zone, and at least one on each side of the vessel.
( b ) Embarkation stations and approaches thereto must: ( 1 ) Be areas that are easily traversed;
( 2 ) Be provided with handholds; and
( 3 ) Be well illuminated.
( c ) Each embarkation station must be arranged to allow the safe boarding of survival craft. They must not be located in areas where rolling of the vessel could cause contact between the propeller(s) and survival craft. Bulwarks, handrails, and lifelines must be fitted with openings that are normally closed but that may be opened while survival craft are being boarded, allowing passengers to pass through rather than climb over.
[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 900, Jan. 10, 1996, as amended by CGD 97-057, 62 FR 51047, Sept. 30, 1997]
#### PHILIP R. LICKER, RECEIVER, APPELLANT, v. JACK R. RUDD, APPELLEE.

Submitted May 17, 1929

Decided June 21, 1929.

Before Justices Paeicer, Black and Bobíne.

For the appellant,

For the respondent,

Pee Curiam.

The suit was for December and January rent of an apartment in an apartment house. Pending the suit, the defendant paid the January rent into court, but defended as to that for December, and the District Court awarded him a judgment.

The ground of defense was that the landlord, represented by the plaintiff as receiver, had undertaken to keep the apartment heated, but that during the month of December failed to do so, and according to the language of the state of the case the defendant stated “that the plaintiff failed to furnish heat sufficient to make the premises comfortable for living purposes, and that said premises were so cold during the month of December, 1928, that he and his wife were compelled to leave the premises from time to time during December, and on one occasion they were compelled to stay at the home of the defendant’s mother.”

*576It does not appear that the defendants vacated the premises in the real sense of that term. On the contrary they seem to have retained possession and actually did pay the rent for January.

In the case of *Higgins*v. *Whiting,*102 *N. J. L.*279, it is intimated that in a situation of this kind the failure to supply agreed heat is a defense to the suit for rent. But this must be read in connection with the fact appearing -in that case that when heat agreed upon was not supplied, the tenant moved out.

The general rule appears to be that where a constructive eviction is claimed it is the duty of the tenant to vacate the premises if he proposes to contest the landlord’s claim for rent. This rule is laid down in such cases as *Metropole Co.*v. *Hartigan,*83 *N. J. L.*414; *Gunther*v. *Oliver,*97 *Id.*376, and *Pabst*v. *Schwarzstein,*101 *Id.*431 (at *p.*433). These cases all rest on the leading ease of *Murray*v. *Albertson,*50 *Id.*167; and the reason is that a tenant cannot at the same time continue to occupy premises and say that he was prevented from using them by some act or omission of the landlord.

It was therefore error in the trial court to award a judgment for the defendant on this ground, and as no other ground was urged, the right of the landlord to recover the rent stood unimpeached.

The judgment will be reversed, and as all the facts before us judgment may be entered in this court for the amount of the unpaid rent, in accordance with the usual practice. *Sullivan*v. *Visconti,*68 *N. J. L.*543, and cases cited.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 14-CV-13436

v. HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

EDWARD J. DAVIS, JR.,

Defendant.

 /

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ALTERNATE SERVICE (Doc. 3)

Plaintiff has filed an ex parte motion for alternative service in this debt collection

matter. Plaintiff has sought to personally serve defendant at his home seven times over

a one-month period. Plaintiff seeks leave to serve by certified mail, first class mail, or

posting. Plaintiff does not need leave of court to serve defendant by certified mail which

is authorized under Mich. Ct. R. 2.105(A)(2). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for alternate

service (Doc. 3) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 19, 2014

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

November 19, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marcia Beauchemin

Deputy Clerk

2:14-cv-13436-GCS-MJH Doc # 4 Filed 11/19/14 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 19
Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OR 15d-14 OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
W. Judson Martin, Senior Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

|Dated: October 27, 2004. |  |     |                                                                                                           
|------------------------ |  | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |  | By: | /s/W. JUDSON MARTINName: W. Judson Martin
Title: Senior Executive Vice President &
Chief Financial Officer

40-F117

---



QuickLinks
§ 139.110 Organizations not subject to further approval. ( a ) A recognized classification society, which has satisfied the requirements in 46 CFR 8.230, meets the requirements of a TPO for the purposes of this part and may perform the work as a third-party auditor.
( b ) An authorized classification society, which has been authorized under 46 CFR part 8, subpart C or D, meets the requirements of a TPO for the purposes of this part and may perform the work as a third-party surveyor.
( c ) The organizations qualifying as TPOs under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section must ensure that employees providing services under this part hold proper qualifications for the particular type of service being performed.
Exhibit 99.01

  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I,Harry Masuda, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial
Officer of Human BioSystems. (the "Registrant"), do hereby certify in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

   (1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant, to which
        this certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully
        complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities
        Exchange Act

        of

        1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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


Dated: May 15, 2003


                                /s/ Harry Masuda
                             ----------------------------
                                 Harry Masuda
                                 Chief Executive Officer and
                                 Acting Chief Financial Officer
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49236, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 151.01-1 Applicability. This part applies to the following: ( a ) Oceangoing, as defined in 33 CFR 151.05(j), non-self-propelled United States ships and non-self-propelled foreign ships operating in United States waters that carry a bulk cargo that is— ( 1 ) Listed in Table 151.05;
( 2 ) Not being carried in a portable tank regulated under subpart 98.30 or 98.33 of this chapter; and
( 3 ) Not an NLS or is an NLS cargo that is a Category D listed in § 151.12-5 of this part.
( b ) All non-self-propelled United States ships that are not oceangoing that carry a bulk cargo that is— ( 1 ) Listed in Table 151.05, and
( 2 ) Not being carried in a portable tank regulated under subpart 98.30 or 98.33 of this chapter.
[CGD 81-101, 52 FR 7776, Mar. 12, 1987, as amended by CGD 84-043, 55 FR 37413, Sept. 11, 1990]
#### § 112.20-1 General.

This subpart contains requirements applicable to emergency power installations having both a temporary and a final emergency power source.
§ 681.22 Are protective orders available? ( a ) A party or prospective witness or deponent may file a motion for a protective order with respect to discovery sought by an opposing party or with respect to the hearing, seeking to limit the availability or disclosure of evidence.
( b ) In issuing a protective order, the ALJ may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: ( 1 ) That the discovery not be had;
( 2 ) That the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions;
( 3 ) That the discovery may be had only through a method of discovery other than requested;
( 4 ) That certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of discovery be limited to certain matters;
( 5 ) That discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the ALJ;
( 6 ) That the contents of the discovery be sealed;
( 7 ) That a deposition after being sealed be opened only by order of the ALJ;
( 8 ) That a trade secret or other confidential research, development, commercial information, or facts pertaining to any criminal investigation, proceeding, or other administrative investigation not be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way; or
( 9 ) That the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the ALJ.
§ 110.30-1 General. ( a ) This section supplements the general requirements for testing and inspecting vessels in other parts of this chapter.
( b ) In the inspection of electric equipment and installations, the rules of the American Bureau of Shipping for materials and construction, and the certificate of classification that refers to them, except as otherwise provided by this subchapter, are accepted as standard.
( c ) This subpart must not be construed to imply that shop tests or factory inspections of electric apparatus or equipment of the types conducted by the American Bureau of Shipping are conducted by the Coast Guard. Shop tests of electric apparatus or equipment are conducted by the Coast Guard only when required by this chapter or when requested, either by the manufacturer, shipbuilder, owner, or the Coast Guard, and agreed to by all.
[CGD 74-125A, 47 FR 15232, Apr. 8, 1982, as amended by CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28275, June 4, 1996]
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49236, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 151.20-15 Cargo hose if carried on the barge. ( a ) Liquid and vapor line hose used for cargo transfer shall be of suitable material resistant to the action of the cargo. Hose shall be suitable for the temperatures to which it may be subjected and shall be acceptable to the Commandant.
( b ) Hose subject to tank pressure, or the discharge pressure of pumps or vapor compressors, shall be designed for a bursting pressure of not less than 5 times the maximum safety relief valve setting of the tank, pump, or compressor, whichever determines the maximum pressure to which the hose may be subjected in service.
( c ) Each new type of cargo hose, complete with end fittings, shall be prototype tested to a pressure not less than five times its specified maximum working pressure. The hose temperature during this prototype test shall duplicate the intended extreme service temperature. Thereafter, each new length of cargo hose produced shall be hydrostatically tested at ambient temperature to a pressure not less than twice its maximum working pressure nor more than two-fifths its bursting pressure. The hose shall be marked with its maximum working pressure, and if used in other than ambient temperature service, its maximum or minimum temperature.
# Senate Floor Activity - Tuesday, March 4, 2014

**

----

## The Journal

## Certain Procedures Dispensed With

## Transaction of Morning Business

## Legislative Business (Tuesday, March  4)

S. 1086

## Adjournment

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Floor Activity Summaries 

View previous floor activity files.Stream live Senate floor proceedings while a meeting is in progress.View past floor proceedings on CSPAN

### Additional Information 

Use this site's search or visit the Senate Index to find pages by topic.

To learn about the history of the Senate visit the About the Senate section of Senate.gov.

### Contact Your Senators 

Follow this guide on how to contact your senators by phone, postal mail, or on the web.