alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.4

               FIRST AMENDMENT TO 1992 EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION PLAN
                                       OF
                              IDENTIX INCORPORATED


        This First Amendment to 1992 Employee Stock Option Plan (the " First
Amendment") amends that certain 1992 Employee Stock Option Plan of Identix
Incorporated, a Delaware corporation (the "Plan"), pursuant to the Unanimous
Written Consent of the Board of Directors dated June 18, 2001.

        1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this First Amendment will
have the meanings given them in the Plan.

        2. The term "Company" shall be deemed to refer to Identix Incorporated,
a Delaware corporation.

        3. Section 6.1.4 of the Plan hereby is amended to read in its entirety
as follows:

                "Option Grants. Except in the case of advance approvals
described in Section 5, the date of grant of an option under this Plan shall be
the date as of which the Committee approves the grant. No option shall be
exercisable, however, until a written stock option agreement in form
satisfactory to the Company is executed by the Company and the optionee. Unless
approved by the holders of a majority of the Company's shares present and
entitled to vote at a duly convened meeting of the Company's shareholders, the
Company shall not grant any stock options with an exercise price that is less
than 100% of the fair market value (determined as described in Section 6.1.11)
of the underlying Common Stock on the date of grant or reduce the exercise price
of any stock option granted under the Plan."

        4. Section 6.2.1 of the Plan hereby is amended to read in its entirety
as follows:

                "Subject to Section 6.1.4, except as set forth in Section
6.1.13, the exercise price of a NQO shall not be less than 85 percent of the
fair market value (determined in accordance with Section 6.1.11) of the stock
subject to the option on the date of grant."

        5. Except to the extent expressly provided in this First Amendment, the
terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.
From: amerspec@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:28:38 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

PREGNANCY IS NOT AN ILLNESS OR DISEASE.

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Tony T

Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10405

Conference Calendar

 

FRENANDO RAY TAYLOR,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CECIL G. PURYEAR; 

WALTON ELMER WILLIAMSON,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:96-CV-94

- - - - - - - - - -

August 18, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Frenando Ray Taylor, Texas prisoner # 535001, appeals the

judgment of the district court construing his pleadings as a

complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and dismissing the

complaint as frivolous. Taylor argues that the district court

erred in not addressing his contentions concerning the recusal of

a state trial judge in a state court proceeding.
No. 97-10405

-2-

Section 1983 is not a proper avenue to pursue the recusal of

a state-court judge. The district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing the action as frivolous. See Ancar v.

Sara Plasma, Inc., 964 F.2d 465, 468 (5th Cir. 1992).

Taylor’s appeal too is without arguable merit and thus

frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.

1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th

Cir. R. 42.2. We warn Taylor that any additional frivolous

appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition

of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Taylor is further cautioned to

review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise

arguments that are frivolous. 

 APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
From: DJHOFF98@YAHOO.COM

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:32:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

John HOFF

La Habra, CA 90631
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62619-62620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19588]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12171]


Determination Under Section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1961 To Provide Military Assistance to Ukraine

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 506(a)(1) of the 
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (the ``Act'') (22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(1)) and 
Presidential Delegation of Authority dated June 27, 2023, I hereby 
determine that:
    <bullet> an unforeseen emergency exists which requires immediate 
military assistance to Ukraine; and
    <bullet> the emergency requirement cannot be met under the 
authority of the Arms Export Control Act or any other provision of law.
    I, therefore, pursuant to authority delegated to me by the 
President, direct the drawdown of up to $500 million in

[[Page 62620]]

defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and 
military education and training, under the authority of section 
506(a)(1) of the Act, to provide assistance to Ukraine. The Department 
of State will coordinate implementation of this drawdown.
    This determination shall be reported to the Congress and published 
in the Federal Register.

    Dated: June 27, 2023.
Antony Blinken,
Secretary of State.

    Note:  This document was received for publication by the Office 
of the Federal Register on September 6, 2023.

[FR Doc. 2023-19588 Filed 9-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- Glad's Original BBQ Express, LLC Under Contract No. CAR 06-116 APPEARANCE FORTHE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 58969

Glenn H. Schlabs, Esq.

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. Colorado Springs, CO Raymond M. Saunders, Esq.

Army ChiefTrial Attorney MAJ Cameron R. Edlefsen, JA

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 9 June 2014

Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 58969, Appeal ofGlad's Original BBQ Express, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREYD. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

# DATE AND TIME:

 September 21, 2023; 1:00 p.m.

# PLACE: 

                        The meeting will be held at the Surface Transportation Board at the address below and also streamed live at                         *https://www.youtube.com/​channel/​UCwKTAlGGHIA0xcN3bDt_​Uqg.*

Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, Room #1042 (Hearing Room), Washington, DC 20423

# STATUS: 

                        The meeting will be held on September 21, 2023, beginning at 1:00 p.m. in the Hearing Room of the Surface Transportation Board and will be open for public observation. If technical issues prevent the Commission from streaming live, the Commission will post a recording of the meeting as soon as possible on the Commission's web page at                         *www.fmc.gov.*                         Any person wishing to attend the meeting in-person should report to Surface Transportation Board with enough time to clear building security procedures.                    

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Staff Briefing, Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022

2. Staff Briefing, Consumer Affairs and Dispute Resolution Services

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Amy Strauss, Acting Secretary, (202) 523-5725.

Jason Guthrie,

Federal Register Alternate Liaison Officer, Federal Maritime Commission.

[FR Doc. 2023-20056 Filed 9-12-23; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
|                          |
|--------------------------|
|                          |  |  |
|                     |   | (Signed)  "Nahla Boury" |
|                     |   | Name:  Nahla Boury, P.Eng |
|                     |   | Title:    President |
|                     |   | DeGolyer and MacNaughton Canada Limited |
|                     |   |   |
| Calgary, Alberta, Canada |   |   |
| March 12, 2015           |   |   |
|                     |   |   |
|                     |   |   |
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed Ju ly 12

,

2022.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 22

- 00365

- CR

JOHATHAN CORDERO , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 344th District Court

Chambers County, Tex as Trial Court Cause No. 22DCR0361

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Johathan Cordero has signed and filed a written request to dism i ss

his appeal

. 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this court has not delivered an

1 We note that the documents attached to the no tice of appeal suggest that (1) appellant

pleaded g uilty and was placed on deferred ad judicatio n community supervision and (2) the trial

court ’ s certification of defendant ’ s right of appeal st ates that appellant has no right of appeal.2

opinion, we grant appellant’s request.

We di s miss the appeal . We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate

immediately. See Tex. R. App. P. 2.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Poissant.

Do Not Publish

– Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

W hile no clerk ’ s record was filed and the attach ments are not part of the appellate record, were we to have these documents in the appellate rec o rd we would dismiss for lack of jurisdicti on

.
EXHIBIT 99.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of BakBone Software Incorporated (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March
31, 2003 (the Report), I, Keith Rickard, President and Chief Executive 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, based on my
knowledge:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: June 26, 2003



BakBone Software Incorporated



|    | 
|--- | 
|By: | 
|    | 



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Page 1 of 2

July 14, 2010 

By Email 

The Honorable Lisa Jackson 

Administrator 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Ariel Rios Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Mail Code: 1101A 

Washington, DC 20460 

jackson.lisa@epa.gov

Re: Request for Public Hearings on the Proposed Coal Ash Rule and Request for 

Extension of the Comment Period 

Dear Administrator Jackson: 

Thank you sincerely for the opportunity you gave to the public to request hearings on the 

proposed coal ash rule. Across the country, citizens are expressing great interest in 

conveying their knowledge and experiences directly to the Agency. According to the 

federal register notice, EPA will be accepting such requests until July 21, 2010. 75 Fed. 

Reg. 35,128, 35,128 (June 21, 2010). We hope that all such requests will be duly 

considered.

In particular, it is clear that citizens and groups in Western Pennsylvania, Tennessee, 

Georgia, and the Ohio Valley are interested in attending an EPA public hearing. All of 

these areas have endured significant adverse impacts from coal ash mismanagement. We 

therefore support the requests for public hearings in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Roane 

County, Tennessee; Atlanta, Georgia; and Louisville, Kentucky. It is critical that the 

voices of these most affected communities be heard in this process. 

Secondly, Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, Southern 

Environmental Law Center, Appalachian Voices, Physicians for Social Responsibility 

and the Environmental Justice Resource Center are requesting a 60-day extension to the 

public comment period. This time is needed to ensure time for a sufficient number of 

public hearings and to ensure that the many complex issues presented in the proposed 

rule are adequately addressed. 

Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. We share your interest in a 

fair and meaningful comment period in which citizens and groups throughout the U.S. are 

granted a full opportunity to participate substantively in this important rulemaking.
Page 2 of 2

Respectfully submitted by: 

Dr. Robert Bullard 

Director 

Environmental Justice Resource Center 

at Clark Atlanta University 

223 James P. Brawley Drive

Atlanta, GA 30314

Lisa Evans 

Senior Administrative Counsel 

Earthjustice 

21 Ocean Ave.

Marblehead, MA 01945 

Barbara Gottlieb

Deputy Director, Environment & Health 

Physicians for Social Responsibility

1875 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 1012

Washington, D.C. 20009

Willa Mays 

Executive Director 

Appalachian Voices

191 Howard Street 

Boone, NC 28607 

Lyndsay Moseley 

Beyond Coal Campaign 

Sierra Club 

408 C St. NE

Washington, DC 20002

Eric Schaeffer 

Executive Director 

Environmental Integrity Project 

1920 L. Street NW, Suite 800

Washington, D.C. 20036

cc: 

Mathy Stanislaus, Assistant Administrator, OSWER 

Alex Livnat, Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division, ORCR

Steve Souders, ORCR
From: ainad@mycidco.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Contraception

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:49:07 PM

I am asking to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law and to reject any exemptions for "religious employers ."

These preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would provide many women better

access to necessary health care .
1

Brown, Kelly

From: Sasser, Erika

Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 6:01 PM

To: Frey, Nathan J.

Cc: Langdon, Robin; Weatherhead, Darryl; Brown, Kelly; Mathias, Scott; Hemby, James; Scavo, 

Kimber; Elman, Barry; Cooperstein, Sharon; Smith, Darcie

Subject: EPA Response to Summary of Interagency Comments Under EO 12866 and 13563 --Ozone 

NAAQs RIA

Attachments: EPA Response to 11-21-2014 SummaryofInteragencyCommentsUnderEO12866_13563

_OzoneNAAQsRIA_miscellaneous 11-24-2014.docx

Nathan, 

Attached please find EPA’s response to comments on the O3 NAAQS RIA received from OMB on Friday November 21, 

2014. Please let me know if you have any questions on these materials. 

Thanks, 

Erika
From: cgcgrgry@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:56:09 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Carl Gregory

Merced, CA 95348