alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.23

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                          THE EXCLUSIVE RAGNAROK ONLINE
                       LICENSE AND DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
                            DATED 2ND DECEMBER, 2003

THIS AMENDMENT (this "Amendment") is made and entered into on this 2nd day of
December, 2003, by and between GRAVITY CORPORATION ("Licensor") and BURDA
HOLDING INTERNATIONAL GMBH("licensee").

WHEREAS, Licensor and Licensee ("Parties" collectively) entered into an
Exclusive Ragnarok Online License and Distribution Agreement ("The Agreement"),
dated November 26th, 2003.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1. The additional "Initial Fee" of 250,000US$ will be paid if licensee starts
   commercial service for any country/countries in Remaining Europe.

   - Revised of 2.1.1 from the original agreement

2. Licensee will put its tools to block all the users from the outside of the
   Territory.

3. The renewal of the term will be of course based on mutual written
   agreement between the parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment the day and year
first above-written.

GRAVITY CORPORATION,                    BURDA HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL GMBH

By: /s/ Jung-Ryool Kim                  By: /s/ Imdat Solak
    ------------------                      ----------------------------
Name: Jung-Ryool Kim                    Name: Mr. Imdat Solak
Title: Chairman                         Title: CEO, The Operation of cRO

                                       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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Army

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of the Army announces the general availability of exclusive, partially exclusive or non-exclusive licenses relative to a novel aeroballistic diagnostic system as described in U.S. Patent 6,349,652; entitled “Aeroballistic Diagnostic System”; Hepner;                         *et al.*                         Any license shall apply comply with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Michael D. Rausa, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Technology Applications,                         *ATTN:*                         AMSRL-DP-AT/Bldg. 434, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5425,                         *Telephone:*                         (410) 278-5028.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

None.

Brenda S. Bowen,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 07-2260 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7646

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JASON O’BRYAN MACKEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-96-114) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 4, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason O’Bryan Mackey, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Jason O’Bryan Mackey appeals from a district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion. We dismiss the appeal as untimely. Mackey did not file his notice of appealwithin the ten-day appeal period or the subsequent thirty-dayextension period after the district court’s order. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b); United States v. Breit , 754 F.2d 526, 528-29 (4th Cir. 1985) (ten-day appeal period set forth in Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) applies to Rule 35 motions). Consequently, we are without jurisdiction to hear the appeal. We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# C_2011282EN.01004102.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/41

---

Action brought on 28 July 2011 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION)

(Case T-412/11)

2011/C 282/78

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Maharishi Foundation Ltd (St. Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Meijboom, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 March 2011 in case R 1293/2010-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 March 2011 in case R 1293/2010-2;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION’ for goods and services in classes 16, 41, 44 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 8246647

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Rejected the application for a Community trade mark, for part of the goods and services

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the Examination Division for further prosecution

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: The applicant puts forward four pleas in law: (i) infringement of Articles 75 and 7(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal did not explicitly decided on Article 7(1)(a) of CTMR, but did, nevertheless, consider that the mark ‘TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION’ is generic; (ii) infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly decided that the mark is devoid of any distinctive character; (iii) infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly concluded that the mark consists exclusively of indications, which may serve, in trade, to designate characteristics of the goods or services, for which applicant filed the mark; and (iv) infringement of Article 7(3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly decided that the mark has not become distinctive in relation to the goods or services, for which registration is requested in consequence of the use, which has been made of it.

Pleas in law:

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-QSK FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,138,963
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,454,994
<ALLOWANCES>                                   112,141
<INVENTORY>                                     26,025
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,635,249
<PP&E>                                       1,080,703
<DEPRECIATION>                                 411,554
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,181,855
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          520,522
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    11,593,905
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,181,855
<SALES>                                      3,370,222
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,370,222
<CGS>                                          114,854
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  114,854
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,711,847
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               209,386
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                645,435
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   645,435
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.19


</TABLE>
#### Florence M. de Meli, *Respondent, v.*Henry A. de Meli, *Appellant*.

Orders affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Brady, J.
V\5-&

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 02-15-00145-CR OFFENSE: OTHER CRIMINAL

Johnathan Cooper v. The State of

STYLE: Texas COUNTY: Tarrant

COA DISPOSITION: DISMISSED TRIAL COURT: 297th District Court

DATE: 06/18/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1031532D

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Johnathan Cooper v. The State of

STYLE: Texas

PRO f>E

CCA#: Wf-/T

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: ilfffl^Xr

JUDGE: "<£K UMa4-<-.

Petition CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
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 withthe Quarterly Report of The Edelman Financial Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2012 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rick Berry, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

1. The Report fullycomplies 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 Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

 

/s/ RICK BERRY	

Rick Berry

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

August 9, 2012

 

 

A signed original ofthis written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Edelman Financial Group Inc. and will be retained by TheEdelman Financial Group Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2014052EN.01000701.xml

| 22.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 December 2013 — Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO, ENRC Marketing AG v Council of the European Union, European Commission, Euroalliages

(Case C-10/12 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Dumping - Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 - Imports of ferro-silicon originating in China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia - Partial interim review - Regulation (EC) No 384/96 - Article 3(7) - Known factors - Injury to European Union industry - Causal link)

2014/C 52/10

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO, ENRC Marketing AG (represented by: A. Willems and S. De Knop, avocats)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent, assisted by G. Berrish, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings:

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet and S. Thomas, acting as Agents), Euroalliages (represented by: J. Bourgeois, Y. van Gerven and N. McNelis, avocats)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 25 October 2011 in Case T-192/08 Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ and ENRC Marketing v Council, by which the General Court dismissed an action seeking partial annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 of 25 February 2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duties imposed on imports of ferro-silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia (OJ 2008 L 55, p. 6).

Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ and ENRC Marketing

Council

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO and ENRC Marketing AG to pay the costs of the present proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO and ENRC Marketing AG to pay the costs of the present proceedings;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs;

| 4. | Orders Euroalliages to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Euroalliages to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.

1

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 199

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 199 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59789, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 199.09 Equivalents.

When this part requires a particular fitting, material, or lifesaving appliance or arrangement, the Commandant (CG-ENG) may accept any other fitting, material, or lifesaving appliance or arrangement that is at least as effective as that required by this part. The Commandant may require engineering evaluations and tests to determine the equivalent effectiveness of the substitute fitting, material, or lifesaving appliance or arrangement.

[CGD 84-069, 61 FR 25313, May 20, 1996, as amended by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49241, Sept. 25, 2009]
#### Porter v. Parks.

Upon a motion to correct a case after settlement, *held, “*I know of no practice which will justify this court at general term correcting the case as settled on motion.”

Motion to correct case. The motion was made in the action last mentioned.

Barnard, P. J.

The head-note contains the entire opinion.

*Motion denied.*
§ 194.90-1 Requirements. ( a ) Vessels contracted for prior to March 1, 1968, shall meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) Existing arrangements, materials, and facilities previously approved but not meeting the applicable requirements of subparts 194.05 through 194.20 may be continued in service so long as they are maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. Minor repairs, alterations, and replacements may be permitted to the same standards as the original design: *Provided,* That in no case will a greater departure from the standards of subparts 194.05 through 194.20 be permitted than presently exists.
( 2 ) All new installations, major alterations, and major replacements shall meet the applicable requirements in this part for new vessels.
( 3 ) The general requirements of subparts 194.05 through 194.20 shall apply unless in the opinion of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, it is unreasonable or impracticable, or the arrangement or construction of the vessel makes it unnecessary.
( b ) [Reserved]
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 24, 2007 / Presidential Documents 20419 

Proclamation 8128 of April 19, 2007 

Dutch-American Friendship Day, 2007 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

On Dutch-American Friendship Day, we celebrate our longtime friendship 

with the Kingdom of the Netherlands and honor the many Dutch Americans 

who have made significant contributions to our country. 

Our close partnership with the Netherlands dates back to the founding 

of our Nation, and it remains among our oldest continuous relationships. 

Many of the Pilgrims first sailed for the New World from a Dutch port, 

and when a small American warship approached the island of St. Eustatius 

in 1776, the Dutch port there gave the American flag its first friendly 

gun salute. A few years later, the Netherlands became one of the first 

nations to recognize the independence of the United States of America. 

The United States and the Netherlands are continuing that tradition of 

close cooperation in the 21st century, working together to bring hope and 

liberty to places where it has long been denied. 

Dutch Americans have enriched the American experience and have helped 

write our history, strengthen our character, and shape our society. Today, 

we pay tribute to our allies in the Netherlands and recognize the proud 

citizens of Dutch ancestry who call America home. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 19, 2007, as DutchAmerican Friendship Day. I encourage all Americans to celebrate our country’s Dutch heritage and the many ways Dutch Americans have strengthened 

our Nation. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with FRD1
20420 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 24, 2007 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this nineteenth day 

of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence 

of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first. 

[FR Doc. 07–2058 

Filed 4–23–07; 9:29 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with FRD1GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
Bank of South Carolina 10-K



Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 USC 1350 (Section 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



I, Fleetwood S. Hassell, President/Chief Executive
Officer of Bank of South Carolina Corporation (the “Company”), certify, that to the best of my knowledge, based upon
a review of the annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2013 of the Company (the “Report”):



| | 1. | the report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                          
| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.     



|Date: February 27, 2014 |     |                                  
|----------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------
|                        |     |                                  
|                        | BY: | /s/Fleetwood S. Hassell          
|                        |     | Fleetwood S. Hassell             
|                        |     | President/Chief Executive Officer
null

360.81448
2:15-cv-10703-APP Doc # 32 Filed 01/20/17 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 131
2:15-cv-10703-APP Doc # 32 Filed 01/20/17 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 132
2:15-cv-10703-APP Doc # 32 Filed 01/20/17 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 133
N. Y. COMMON PLEAS.

#### Hamilton E. Fowle agt. Hiram C. Covert.

*General Term,*

*January,*1874.

*Jurisdiction of this court.*

This court has no jurisdiction of an action brought therein for the recovery of money only, where the defendant is not a resident of the city of New York, nor served with process therein.

Proceedings upon attachment of defendant’s property, order for publication and service by mail, and judgment thereon, set aside as irregular.

*Before*Halt, *Oh. J.,*Bobihsobt *and*J. F. Daly, *JJ.*

J. F. Daly, *J.*

This is an appeal from an order made at special term. The action was upon contract for the recovery of money only. Prior to the act chapter 239, Laws of 1873, this court would have jurisdiction of the action if the defendant resided in the city of New York or was served with the summons therein *(Code, section*33). The action having been brought after the passage of the act aforesaid, the plaintiff, on proof that the defendant was not a resident of this state and could not be found therein, but had property therein liable to attachment, obtained an order for the publication of' the summons and service by mail thereof and a warrant of attachment against defendant’s property. On failure of defendant to answer, and on proof of service by publication of summons and of levy under the attachment issued, judgment was entered against defendant. The judgment was irregular, this court not having acquired jurisdiction *(Sanders*agt. *Staten*
      *121
      *Island Railroad*Company, *Abb.*[ *U.*S.], 346). The order of publication, the judgment and all proceedings thereunder, the levy under the attachment must be set aside. The warrant of attachment will be set aside because it may be issued before the summons is served *(Woodward*agt. Stearns, 10 *Abb.*[ *U.*S.], 395), but defendant may move to vacate it on further papers as he shall be advised.