alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.18


Summary of Related  Transaction  Agreement  by and between  Shenzhen BAK Battery
Co.,  Ltd. (the  "Company")  and Jilin  Provincial  Huaruan  Technology  Company
Limited by Shares ("Huaruan Company") dated as of October 18, 2003.

         The  agreement  relates to the  transfer of one patent and seven patent
application  rights from Huaruan Company to the Company for consideration in the
amount of RMB  32,000,000  Yuan.  The  first  payment  is due  within 30 days of
execution of the  agreement.  In the event of breach of contract,  the breaching
party must pay RMB  100,000  Yuan to the  non-breaching  party.  The Company has
fully performed on this agreement.
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.060-4 Materials—nonstandard vests. ( a ) *General.* All materials used in nonstandard buoyant vests must be equivalent to those specified in § 160.060-3 and be obtained from a supplier who furnishes an affidavit in accordance with the requirements in § 160.060-3(a).
( b ) *Reinforcing tape.* When used, the reinforcing tape around the neck shall be 3 ⁄ 4′′ cotton tape weighing not less than 0.18 ounce per linear yard having a minimum breaking strength of not less than 120 pounds.
[CGFR 65-37, 30 FR 11590, Sept. 10, 1965, as amended by CGD 72-163R, 38 FR 8122, Mar. 28, 1973]
#### § 185.608 Fuel shutoff valves.

Remote fuel shutoff stations must be marked in clearly legible letters at least 25 millimeters (1 inch) high indicating purpose of the valve and direction of operation.
**EXHIBIT31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Craig Johnson, certifythat:

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of TorreyPines Therapeutics, Inc. for the quarterended September 30, 2007;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

a) all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

b) any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2007
|   |   | /s/ Craig Johnson                                                |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Craig Johnson                                                    |
|   |   | Vice President,  Finance, Chief Financial Officer  and Secretary |
|   |   | (Principal Financial  and Accounting Officer)                    |

 

----
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of PowerHouse Technologies Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, David R. Wells, Vice President, Finance (Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

     (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 result of operations of
          the Company.


                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Richard Liebman
                                   Interim Chief Financial Officer
                                   (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
                                   December 20, 2005
!

 "#$% & '(   &&!

))	*+ ,-!. /0""1   ( 

! -  222%3456%789:7;<8%=:> ( '!'

?@#A"/AB# &

& C@#A"/A ?







 7=78<,"B"#



D5?;:9<:;E.F3GH5!:%

I5?;:9<:;E.F3GH5?HFJF

!4I94IIF<4,D4:/"B"



I5@KLMNOPQRSTUVWOXYOWZ[\]^MU_OR

  !F85:%#A9>A#B"



5F;D5?;:9<:;E.F3GH5!:%,



DF>5G55I9:I<F9<56G`a76=5;F4I2D:b;584656:>5;<D5FG:>5;5c5;5I9569F85%



a76=5;F4I4Ic:;35635<DF<4<DF8G55IG;:7=D<<:D48F<<5I<4:I<DF<2D4H5D5b;584656

:>5;<D59F85,D5:2I568<:9d4ID5?;:9<:;E.F3GH5!:%48:2I5;8D4b:c8<:9dI54<D5;

Fcc59<56I:;43bF9<56D48659484:I8:I<D59F85%:25>5;,DF6D5dI:2I:cD48:2I5;8D4b:c

8<:9d4I<D59:;b:;F<4:IF<<D5<435,4<2:7H6DF>5;5e74;56;5978FH7I65;<D5!:65:c!:I679<

c:;<D5I4<56<F<58a76=58,FI6<D78,a76=5;F4I64;59<56<DF<I:<4c`<D5bF;<458:c<D548875%



 6>48:;`b4I4:If#,c;:3<D5a76494FH!:Ic5;5I95!:658:c!:I679<!:334<<55,

b;:>4658<D5c:HH:24I==746FI95c:;F66;5884I=648e7FH4c49F<4:I<DF<48I:<6489:>5;567I<4HFc<5;

Fg76=5DF8bF;<494bF<564IF9F85@



h ig76=58D:7H66489H:85<:<D5bF;<458<D5cF9<8G5F;4I=:I648e7FH4c49F<4:IF8

8::IF8<D:85cF9<8F;5H5F;I565>5I<D:7=D<DF<3F`:997;Fc<5;5I<;`:cF

659484:I%D5bF;<4583F`<D5I65<5;34I52DF<;5H45c<D5`3F`855dFI6F9:7;<

j24<D:7<<D5648e7FH4c456g76=5k24HH659465<D5H5=FH9:I85e75I95,4cFI`,F;484I=

c;:3<D5bF;<494bF<4:I:c<D5648e7FH4c456g76=54I<D55I<5;56659484:I%



 H<D:7=D 6>48:;`b4I4:If#9:I<53bHF<58648e7FH4c49F<4:IFc<5;F!:7;<:c bb5FH8

:;FHF;=735I<,<D5!:334<<555lbHF4I56mh8i434HF;9:I8465;F<4:I2:7H6FbbH`2D5IFg76=35I<

2F85I<5;564IF648<;49<9:7;<G`Fg76=5FI64<48HF<5;H5F;I56<DF<<D5g76=52F8648e7FH4c456%n

Case 2:15-cv-10259-GAD-MKM ECF No. 29, PageID.119 Filed 08/05/21 Page 1 of 2
	




	
 

	 !!"
!#!!	 !$%!&		'	

(!('!	)'*		 ! '		!	 !	!*!#

		'	+!+(	,
!	 !	*''+!	+

!-(	*  !($%!

)!'

.!/%0		1

#!	

Case 2:15-cv-10259-GAD-MKM ECF No. 29, PageID.120 Filed 08/05/21 Page 2 of 2
# C_2015389EN.01002501.xml

| 23.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2015 — TV2/Danmark v Commission

(Case T-674/11) (1)

1

((State aid - Public broadcasting service - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Aid implemented by the Danish authorities in favour of the Danish public service broadcaster TV2/Danmark - Public financing granted to compensate for costs inherent in the performance of public service obligations - Concept of aid - Altmark judgment))

(2015/C 389/25)

Language of the case: Danish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: TV2/Danmark A/S (Odense, Denmark) (represented by: O. Koktvedgaard, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, C. Støvlbæk and U. Nielsen, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented initially by C. Vang and V. Pasternak Jørgensen, Agents, then subsequently by V. Pasternak Jørgensen, assisted by K. Lundgaard Hansen, lawyer, and finally by C. Thorning, Agent, assisted by K. Lundgaard Hansen and R. Holdgaard, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Viasat Broadocasting UK Ltd (West Drayton, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Kalsmose-Hjelmborg and M. Honoré, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Partial annulment of Commission Decision 2011/839/EU of 20 April 2011 concerning Danish measures (C 2/03) in favour of TV2/Danmark (OJ 2011 L 340, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision 2011/839/EU of 20 April 2011 concerning Danish measures (C 2/03) in favour of TV2/Danmark in so far as the Commission found that the advertising revenues for the years 1995 and 1996 paid to TV2/Danmark through the TV2 Fund constituted State aid. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision 2011/839/EU of 20 April 2011 concerning Danish measures (C 2/03) in favour of TV2/Danmark in so far as the Commission found that the advertising revenues for the years 1995 and 1996 paid to TV2/Danmark through the TV2 Fund constituted State aid.

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

| 3. | Orders TV2/Danmark A/S to bear its own costs and to pay three-quarters of the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders TV2/Danmark A/S to bear its own costs and to pay three-quarters of the costs incurred by the European Commission.

| 4. | Orders the Commission to bear one-quarter of its costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Commission to bear one-quarter of its costs.

| 5. | Orders the Kingdom of Denmark and Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd each to bear their respective costs. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Orders the Kingdom of Denmark and Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd each to bear their respective costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 17.3.2012.

1

---
§ 169.103 Applicability. ( a ) This subchapter applies to each domestic vessel operating as a sailing school vessel.
( b ) This subchapter does not apply to— ( 1 ) Any vessel operating exclusively on inland waters, which are not navigable waters of the United States;
( 2 ) Any vessel while laid up, dismantled, and out of service;
( 3 ) Any vessel with title vested in the United States and which is used for public purposes except vessels of the U.S. Maritime Administration;
( 4 ) Any vessel carrying one or more passengers;
( 5 ) Any vessel operating under the authority of a current valid certificate of inspection issued per the requirements of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter H or T, 46 CFR parts 70 through 78 and parts 175 through 187, respectively; or
( 6 ) Any foreign vessel.
( c ) A vessel which engages in trade or commerce or carries one or more passengers, cannot operate under a certificate of inspection as a sailing school vessel, but must meet the rules and regulations governing the service in which it is engaged.
[CGD 83-005, 51 FR 896, Jan. 9, 1986, as amended by USCG-1999-5040, 67 FR 34799, May 15, 2002]
#### § 171.120 Specific applicability.

Each vessel that is 100 gross tons or more must comply with § 171.122 and each vessel under 100 gross tons must comply with § 171.124.

[CGD 85-080, 62 FR 51354, Sept. 30, 1997]
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

          - 14 CFR Part 71
          - [Docket No. FAA-2006-25945; Airspace Docket No. 06-ACE-15]

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date. 

# SUMMARY:

This document confirms the effective date of the direct final rule which revises Class E airspace at Alliance, NE.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         0901 UTC, May 10, 2007.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Grant Nichols, System Support, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: (816) 329-2522.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for comments in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 11, 2007 (72 FR 1279). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on May 10, 2007. No adverse comments were received, and thus this notice confirms that this direct final rule will become effective on that date.                

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas on February 20, 2007.

Donald R. Smith, 

Manager, System Support Group, ATO Central Service Area.

[FR Doc. 07-1161 Filed 3-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.25 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 6
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.26 Filed 02/23/16 Page 2 of 6
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.27 Filed 02/23/16 Page 3 of 6
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.28 Filed 02/23/16 Page 4 of 6
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.29 Filed 02/23/16 Page 5 of 6
Case 5:15-cv-11048-JEL-APP ECF No. 11, PageID.30 Filed 02/23/16 Page 6 of 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PATRICIA ROUSSETY,

Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 -vs- Case No. 2:14-CV-11677-JCO-MJH

Hon. John Corbett O'Meara

Magistrate Judge: Michael J. Hluchaniuk

NATIONAL CREDITORS CONNECTIONS, INC. ,

GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC ,

Defendants.

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Having been advised by the stipulation of the parties below, it is ordered that

the claims against Green Tree Servicing, LLC, are dismissed with prejudice and

without costs, attorney fees or sanctions to any party.

The court retains jurisdiction only for purposes of enforcing the settlement in

this matter.

SO ORDERED.

Date: July 10, 2015 s/John Corbett O’Meara

United States District Judge

Stipulated To By:

1

Case 5:14-cv-11677-JCO-MJH ECF No. 43, PageID.173 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 2
s/ Julie A. Petrik (P47131) 

Attorney For Plaintiff

Lyngklip & Associates Consumer Law

Center, PLC

Southfield, MI 48075

 (248) 208-8864

Julie@MichiganConsumerLaw.Com

s/ by consent Martin C. Bryce Jr.

Attorney for Green Tree Servicing, LLC 

Martin C. Bryce, Jr.

Ballard Spahr LLP

1735 Market Street, 51st Floor

Philadelphia, PA 19103

215-864-82

Bryce@ballardspahr.com

2

Case 5:14-cv-11677-JCO-MJH ECF No. 43, PageID.174 Filed 07/10/15 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2162 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 142
111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2162

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2009

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

                             July 30, 2009

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 123 11th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho, as the ``Herbert A Littleton 
                           Postal Station''.

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

SECTION 1. HERBERT A LITTLETON POSTAL STATION.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 123 11th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Herbert A Littleton Postal Station''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Herbert A 
Littleton Postal Station''.
                                                       Calendar No. 142

111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2162

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 123 11th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho, as the ``Herbert A Littleton 
                           Postal Station''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 30, 2009

                       Reported without amendment
```
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-3003

___________________________

Amarjit Singh; Manjit Kaur; Dripinder Singh

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioners

v.

Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States

1

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: May 5, 2015

Filed: May 14, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Amarjit Singh, his wife Manjit Kaur, and their son Dripinder Singh, natives and

citizens of India, petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration

Loretta E. Lynch is substituted for her predecessor, Eric H. Holder, Jr., as the

1

Attorney General of the United States. See Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2).
Appeals (BIA) denying their fourth motion to reopen removal proceedings. After

careful review, we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the

motion as untimely and numerically barred. See Zheng v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 893 (8th

Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

-2-
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, John T. Sawyer,certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Penhall InternationalCorp. fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in thisquarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the registrant.

 
| Date: November 14,  2005 |   | /s/ John T. Sawyer |
|-------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                          |   | John T. Sawyer          |
|                          |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
EX-10.(4)(3)


  Exhibit 10.4.3

 
 

	 
	 InMed Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.
 Suite #340- 200 Granville St. 
 Vancouver, BC V6C 1S4
 Canada

 


  

 
  
  

 
  
 4 March
2019
  
  
 Dear Eric
Hsu,
  
 On behalf of InMed’s Board
of Directors, I am pleased to announce your promotion to Senior Vice President, Pre-Clinical R&D. Additionally, in recognition of your agreement to increase your work commitment to InMed to full time (100%), I am pleased to make the following
changes to your compensation:
  
 Base Salary - will increase to $290,000 effective March 1,
2019; and
  
 Options - subject to approval by the Board of
Directors, you will be issued an additional 255,000 options to purchase common shares in the Company as per the Company’s standard options policies, priced on or around the date of this letter.

 
 On behalf of the entire Management Team and Board of Directors, thank you for your contributions to
the Company’s success and we look forward to achieving more, together.
 /s/ Eric A. Adams 

Eric A. Adams President and CEO
 InMed Pharmaceuticals
Inc.