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




                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.18

           THIRD AMENDMENT TO UNITED STATES EXCLUSIVE SUPPLY AGREEMENT

WHEREAS, THE QUIGLEY CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation with its offices at 621
Shady Retreat Road, Doylestown, PA. 18901 (hereinafter referred to as
"Quigley"), and JOEL, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation with offices at 31 North
Spruce Street, Elizabethtown, PA. 17022 (hereinafter referred to as "JOEL")
entered into a United States Exclusive Supply Agreement on March 17, 1997,
extended by an Amendment to United States Exclusive Supply Agreement dated March
2000, and extended by an Amendment to United States Exclusive Supply Agreement
dated June 29, 2001; and

WHEREAS, Paragraph 32 of the Agreement states that the Agreement may be amended
by a written instrument executed by duly authorized representatives of Quigley
and JOEL; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to continue the Agreement of March 17, 1997 in full
force and effect as amended by the March 2000 Amendment to United States
Exclusive Supply Agreement, and by the June 29, 2001 Amendment to United States
Exclusive Supply Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

      20.   TERM. This Agreement shall be effective for an additional period of
            two (2) years from March 17, 2004, with yearly renewal thereafter.

All other terms and conditions of the Agreement between the parties dated March
17, 1997 and amends the Amendments to United States Exclusive Supply Agreement
dated March 2000 and June 29, 2001, which are incorporated into this Amendment,
and shall continue in full force and effect as fully set forth herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties hereto
have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized
representatives on the 8th day of January, 2004.

                                          THE QUIGLEY CORPORATION

Attest:                                   By: /s/ Guy J. Quigley
                                              ------------------------------
                                          Name: Guy J. Quigley
                                                ----------------------------
/s/ George J. Longo                       Title: President
--------------------------                       ---------------------------


                                          JOEL, INC.

Attest:                                   By: /s/ David B. Deck
                                              ------------------------------
                                          Name: David B. Deck
                                                ----------------------------
/s/ Judy Johnson                          Title: President
--------------------------                       ---------------------------
###### Editorial Note on Part 397

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 397 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 397.77 Judicial review of dispute decision.

Any State or Indian tribe adversely affected by the Administrator's decision under § 397.75 of this subpart may seek review by the appropriate district court of the United States under such proceeding only by filing a petition with such court within 90 days after such decision becomes final.
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 309

Honoring the United States Capitol Police for their commitment to security

at the Capitol.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 6, 2001

Ms. LEE (for herself, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. NEY, and Mr. HOYER) submitted

the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House

Administration

RESOLUTION

Honoring the United States Capitol Police for their

commitment to security at the Capitol.

Whereas the Capitol is an important symbol of freedom and

democracy across the United States and throughout the

world, and those who safeguard the Capitol safeguard

that freedom and democracy;

Whereas millions of people visit the Capitol each year to observe and learn the workings of the democratic process;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police force was created

by Congress in 1828 to provide security for the Capitol;

Whereas today the United States Capitol Police provide protection and support services throughout an array of congressional buildings, parks, and thoroughfares;
2

•HRES 309 IH

Whereas the United States Capitol Police provide security for

Members of Congress, their staffs, other government employees, and many others who live near, work on, and

visit Capitol Hill;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have successfully

managed and coordinated major demonstrations, joint

sessions of Congress, State of the Union Addresses, State

funerals, and inaugurations;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have bravely faced

numerous emergencies, including three bombings and two

shootings, one of which, in 1998, tragically took the lives

of Private First Class Jacob ‘‘J.J.’’ Chestnut and Detective John Michael Gibson;

Whereas the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have

created a uniquely difficult environment for the United

States Capitol Police;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police responded to this

challenge quickly and courageously, including by facilitating the evacuation of all of the buildings under their

purview, as well as the perimeter thereof; and

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have instituted

longer shifts, requiring that officers work substantial

overtime each week to ensure the continued protection of

the Capitol: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors

2 and thanks the United States Capitol Police for their out3 standing work and dedication during a period of height4 ened security that began on September 11, 2001.

Æ
August 17, 2015

US. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20210

Dear U.S. Department of Labor,

lam writing to you today to express my outrage at the devastatingly misguided
fiduciary standard proposal for the Financial Services Industry currently under
debate at the Department Of Labor (DOL).

I own a small financial services business in Pelham, NH. I have approximately
$60,000,000 under management and on the books. Last year my gross revenue was
$360,000 or 60 basis points (.6%) of assets on the books. My revenue breaks down
approximately 1/3 fee based on assets under management and 2/3 commissions on
new product sales and trail commissions.

The DOL proposal, if it were to pass, would devastate my business. It essentially
would wipe out my current business and force mé to work exclusively with my top
75- 90 wealthiest clients. The’ rest of my clients would be'abandoned. I‘simply
could not afford to service them, guidé them through their investment and
retirement planning, and help them achieve the returns needed to fund their
retirements.

If the DOL proposal goes through, I believe it would result in the following
outcomes:

1. My revenue would likely drop by 30-40%.
2. I would have to retrench and work only with my top 75-90 clients.

3. I would not be able to serve the bottom 2/3 of my client base. The relationship
that I have maintained with these ioyal clients, some of whom I’ve worked with for
over 20 years, would need io be terminated. They would be forced to do their own
retirement and investment pianning, a job they are not suited for either by training
or temperament.


4. The clients who I have worked with and who have a borderline- at best-
likelihood of achieving a desirable retirement outcome would be abandoned. They
will almost certainly make mistakes in their budgeting, spending decisions,
withdrawal rates, and asset allocations that will cause them to fall short in
retirement. This DOL proposal will likely lead to negative retirement outcomes for
tens of thousands of these borderline clients will no longer be served by their
Financial Advisors.

5. I will terminate my full-time employee and part-time employee and hire a part
time college intern to replace them. With 200 fewer clients, I will have no need for
60 hours per week in staff support.

6. My net income would be cut in half.
7. My business valuation would go from $700,000 to virtually zero.

As a tax paying resident of Pelham, NH, a small business owner, and an employer
of two, I strongly suggest that you do all that you can to pressure the DOL to
terminate their misguided proposal. It is an impractical proposal, burdensome, and
completely unnecessary. It will lead to a number of devastatingly bad, unintended
consequences for the financial services industry and those they serve.

Please respond to my letter by indicating the specific actions you will take in
defense of my business and in safeguarding and maintaining the current retirement

choices available to retail investors.

Sincerely

R P ,CFP
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 286 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 14, 2001.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2500) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, 
and for other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered 
as read.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 423 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                          May 16, 2002.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Government Reform: Mr. John 
Sullivan.
    Committee on the Judiciary: Mr. J. Randy Forbes.
    Committee on Science: Mr. John Sullivan.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
§ 601.10 Sources of information. ( a ) *FTA guidance documents.* ( 1 ) Circulars and other guidance/policy information are available on FTA's Web site: *http://www.fta.dot.gov .*
( 2 ) Single copies of any guidance document may be obtained without charge by calling FTA's Administrative Services Help Desk, at (202) 366-4865.
( 3 ) Single copies of any guidance document may also be obtained without charge upon written request to the Associate Administrator for Administration, Federal Transit Administration, 400 7th Street SW., Room 9107, Washington, DC, 20590, or to any FTA regional office listed in § 601.2.
( b ) *DOT Docket Management System.* Unless a particular document says otherwise, the following rulemaking documents in proceedings started after February 1, 1997, are available for public review and copying at the Department of Transportation's Docket Management System, Room PL 401, 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20590, or for review and downloading through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov:* ( 1 ) Advance notices of proposed rulemaking;
( 2 ) Notices of proposed rulemaking;
( 3 ) Comments received in response to notices;
( 4 ) Petitions for rulemaking and reconsideration;
( 5 ) Denials of petitions for rulemaking and reconsideration; and
( 6 ) Final rules.
( c ) Any person may examine docketed material, at any time during regular business hours after the docket is established, and may obtain a copy of such material upon payment of a fee, except material ordered withheld from the public under section 552(b) of Title 5 of the United States Code.
( d ) Any person seeking documents not described above may submit a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by following the procedures outlined in 49 CFR Part 7.
From: Theresa Wan [mailto:twan@treesafinancial.com] 

Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 3:19 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

I would like to express my support for the DOL’s proposed rule that financial advisors who provide 

retirement advice must be fiduciaries. 

I’ve been a fee-only financial planner since 2008 (worked with a larger firm for several years, then left to 

start my own practice to serve middle Americans) and believe that everyone deserves to receive 

fiduciary advice when they hire financial advisors. I have come across many clients over the years who 

were sold products with high and hidden fees that they were not aware of, or felt pressured by the 

salespeople to purchase a product even though they did not understand what they were buying. As a 

fiduciary I have to act in an honest way and provide advice that I believe is in the best interest of the 

client. And in order to do so, I need to ask questions, listen to what the clients’ overall financial goals 

and concerns are, and then make a recommendation based on their needs as well as their specific 

situation. More and more clients who come to me are saying that they are looking for fiduciaries and it’s 

the only way they feel comfortable working with someone. The suitability test does not put any 

responsibility on the advisor’s part to make sure that the product is actually in the client’s best interest. 

The incentive is to sell a product that is “suitable” and generates a higher commission rather than 

something that may be “better” for the client but generates a lower commission. Most of the time (from 

what I understand) clients who buy products from non-fiduciaries never hear from them again, unless 

it’s to sell them another product. In my practice, I follow up with clients to make sure that their situation 

hasn’t changed and if they have, to meet again to review their situation.

Regards,

Theresa

Theresa C. Wan, CFP®, CFA

Principal and Financial Planner

Treesa Financial Planning LLC

P.O. Box 341, 138 Veterans Plaza

Dumont, NJ 07628

201-771-0250

www.treesafinancial.com
###### Editorial Note on Part 40

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

#### § 40.49 What materials are used to collect oral fluid specimens?

For each DOT drug test, you must use a collection device meeting the requirements of appendix B of this part.

[88 FR 27640, May 2, 2023]
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | To                my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,                in                all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of the Company as of and for the period covered by the                Report. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                              |                                                         |                               |
|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| Date:              March 26, 2008 | By:                                                | */s/              Phillip W. Ware* |
|                              | Phillip              W. Ware                                 |
|                              | President,              Chief              Executive Officer |
|                              | and Principal Accounting Officer                             |
|                              | Accounting              Officer                              |

----
§ 585.86 Reporting requirements. ( a ) *General reporting requirements.* Within 60 days after the end of the production years ending August 31, 2009, August 31, 2010, and August 31, 2011, each manufacturer must submit a report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concerning its compliance with Standard No. 126 (49 CFR 571.126) for its passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) produced in that year. Each report must— ( 1 ) Identify the manufacturer;
( 2 ) State the full name, title, and address of the official responsible for preparing the report;
( 3 ) Identify the production year being reported on;
( 4 ) Contain a statement regarding whether or not the manufacturer complied with the requirements of Standard No. 126 (49 CFR 571.126) for the period covered by the report and the basis for that statement;
( 5 ) Provide the information specified in paragraph (b) of this section;
( 6 ) Be written in the English language; and
( 7 ) Be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
( b ) *Report content* — ( 1 ) *Basis for statement of compliance.* Each manufacturer must provide the number of passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less, manufactured for sale in the United States for each of the three previous production years, or, at the manufacturer's option, for the current production year. A new manufacturer that has not previously manufactured these vehicles for sale in the United States must report the number of such vehicles manufactured during the current production year.
( 2 ) *Production.* Each manufacturer must report for the production year for which the report is filed: the number of passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less that meet Standard No. 126 (49 CFR 571.126).
( 3 ) *Statement regarding compliance.* Each manufacturer must provide a statement regarding whether or not the manufacturer complied with the ESC requirements as applicable to the period covered by the report, and the basis for that statement. This statement must include an explanation concerning the use of any carry-forward credits.
( 4 ) *Vehicles produced by more than one manufacturer.* Each manufacturer whose reporting of information is affected by one or more of the express written contracts permitted by S8.6.2 of Standard No. 126 (49 CFR 571.126) must: ( i ) Report the existence of each contract, including the names of all parties to the contract, and explain how the contract affects the report being submitted.
( ii ) Report the actual number of vehicles covered by each contract.
From: Subhash Sen [mailto:subhash_sen2003@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 11:25 AM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

I read Ms. Singletary's article about the "fiduciary duty" of our financial advisor. But for 

us mostly ignorant people how do you know if they are actually doing it if they say yes.

Instead of giving generic advice in your column, please indicate what are the specific questions 

we should ask them for their fiduciary duty and let us know what should be the correct answers 

for each of the question from them.

Also please don't tell us to read your book. Most of us will not understand what you are saying 

in your book.

Anyway, you unferstand our frustrations dealing with the financial advisor.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Subhash Sen

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
# Completion of Juniper Oak 23.2 Exercise

/ Published Jan. 26, 2023

Jan. 26,2023

Release Number 20230126-01

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**TAMPA, Fla.**–Today, U.S. Central Command and the Israel DefenseForces concluded Juniper Oak 23.2, the largest U.S.-Israel partnered exercise in history. Juniper Oak 23.2 integrated U.S. and Israeli 5th generation fighter assets, the USS George H.W. Bush Carrier Strike Group, command and control elements, rescue and refueling aircraft during a long-range large force exercise that included a live fire exercise with more than 140 aircraft including B52s, F35s, F15s, F16s, FA-18s, AC-130, AH64s, 12 naval assets, High Mobility Rocket Artillery Systems, Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, a mix of jet fighters, and long-range bombers.

Juniper Oak 23.2 enhanced interoperability and the ability of CENTCOM forces to rapidly move combat power into the region. “Today the partnership between CENTCOM and the IDF is stronger and continues to grow,” said Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla, CENTCOM commander. “Our partnership is a key pillar of our commitment to expanding regional security cooperation.”

“We at CENTCOM will take the lessons learned from Exercise Juniper Oak and share and incorporate them with all our partners across the CENTCOM region,” Kurilla concluded.

Roughly 6,400 U.S. troops alongside more than 1,500 Israeli troops participated in the exercise. CENTCOM remains committed to strengthening partnerships and enhancing interoperability in support of a more stable, more secure region.

-30-
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, October 30, 1995 (136), Para 136.12 Message from the Senate]
[Page 1800]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.136.12  message from the senate

  A message from the Senate by Mr. Lundregan, one of its clerks, 
announced that the Senate had passed with an amendment a bill of the 
House of the following title:

       H.R. 2491. An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to 
     section 105 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 1996.

  The message also announced that pursuant to Public Law 86-380, the 
Chair, on behalf of the Vice President, appoints Mr. Thomas to the 
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, vice Mr. Dorgan.
```