alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.4







 


 








 


AMENDMENT TO


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS, Derma Sciences, Inc. (“Employer”)
and John E. Yetter (“Employee”) are parties to that certain Employment Agreement dated as of March 7, 2012 (the
“Agreement”).


 


WHEREAS, Employer and Employee desire to
amend the Agreement to remove Employee’s ability to receive severance benefits upon Employee’s voluntary termination
of employment within six months of the occurrence of a change in control of Employer.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
recitals set forth above, and for other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,
Employer and Employee agree that the Agreement be amended as follows:


 


1.     Section 7 of the Agreement is hereby
deleted in its entirety.


 


2.     Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Agreement
are hereby re-numbered as Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10, respectively.


 


3.     The second sentence of Section 7 of the Agreement is
hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 


This Agreement is intended to comply with the requirements
of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations thereunder (“Section 409A”).


 


4.     Section 8 of
the Agreement (Option Exercise Extension) is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 


In the event that Employer, without cause, either terminates
Employee’s employment or fails to renew this Agreement upon expiration hereof, then the period to exercise any option to
purchase the securities of Employer of which Employee may be possessed shall be extended to the earlier to occur of (i) the expiration
thereof as set forth in the option instrument or (ii) the 10th anniversary of the original date of grant.


 


Except as set forth herein, all of the other provisions of the
Agreement shall remain in effect.


 


This amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall be considered one and the same agreement.


 


[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]


 



    	 



    	 



    

 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed
this amendment on the 20th day of December, 2012.


 







	 	 	DERMA SCIENCES, INC.
	 	 	 
	 		/s/   Edward J. Quilty
	 	 	By: Edward J. Quilty
Title: President and Chief Executive
Officer









	 	 	EMPLOYEE.
	 	 	 
	 		/s/    John E. Yetter
	 	 	Name:  John E. Yetter



 








    	2
No. 639, Misc.

#### Moore *v.*California.

District Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District. Certiorari denied.
From: Joyce Murdock

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Access to Preventive Care and Contrception

Date: Thursday, August 18, 2011 1:14:53 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to

accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine pertaining 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 countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access

to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive

services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some

groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so

hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement,

even though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger

exemption would deny access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
From: emiarmstrong@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:45:26 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.

It is against my feelings of what God wishes us to do and, as an American taxpayer, I don't like being

in this position by force.

Sincerely,

Emily Armstrong

, 23188-3414
No. 407, Misc.

#### Penrice *v.*California.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California and for other relief denied.
**Exhibit23.1**

**Consentof Grant Thornton LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We have issued ourreports dated July 27, 2007, accompanying the consolidated financial statements(which report expressed an unqualified opinion and contains an explanatoryparagraph relating to the adoption of SFAS 123R effective June 1, 2006) andschedule and management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Immucor, Inc. on Form10-K for the year ended May 31, 2007.  Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in theRegistration Statements of Immucor, Inc. on Forms S-8 (file numbers 333-131399,33-41406, 33-49882, 033-62097, 333-90552, 333-109210, and 333-131902).

Atlanta, GeorgiaJuly 27, 2007

----
#### John Denna, Respondent, v. Jerome Denna and others, Appellants.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements. Opinion by Dykman, J.: Barnard, P. J., not sitting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         757,397
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               38,854,298
<ALLOWANCES>                                   483,892
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            40,323,986
<PP&E>                                       1,685,390
<DEPRECIATION>                                 340,541
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,595,027
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       40,405,742
<BONDS>                                        728,854
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         16
<COMMON>                                        23,055
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,437,360
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,595,027
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,961,070
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,844,180
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 26,504
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,504
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,504
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>
From: carold@hughes.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:41:35 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,

Jimmy Dunn

Sallisaw, OK 74955
Exhibit



Exhibit 10(b)





Summary of Compensation for Sumner M. Redstone, Chairman Emeritus




As previously disclosed, on February 2, 2016, Sumner M. Redstone resigned from his position as Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of CBS Corporation (the “Company”), and on February 3, 2016, the Board appointed Mr. Redstone to the position of Chairman Emeritus.  In connection with this appointment, Mr. Redstone will continue his employment with the Company as an at-will employee and will continue to serve as a director of the Company.  In addition, the Compensation Committee of the Board approved a new compensation arrangement with Mr. Redstone as follows:


•                 Mr. Redstone will receive an annual payment of $1 million, payable in accordance with the Company’s customary payroll practices, for his continuing role with the Company as Chairman Emeritus who will be available for advice and consultation, and in recognition of many years of leadership as Executive Chairman of the Board and his significant historical contributions to the Company during his previous executive positions.  


•                 Mr. Redstone will continue to be eligible to participate in the Company-sponsored benefits and deferred compensation programs and other benefits, including indemnification and life insurance during his employment, that were previously available to him under his prior employment agreement. 


A copy of Mr. Redstone’s prior employment agreement dated December 29, 2005 has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 30, 2005; a copy of the letter agreement dated March 13, 2007 amending the prior employment agreement has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as Exhibit 10 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 16, 2007; and a copy of the letter agreement dated December 10, 2008 further amending the prior employment agreement has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as Exhibit 10(m) to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008.
SECOND ADDENDUM TO LEASE

                             LESSOR: FRANK F. PARKER

               LESSEE: DENTAL/MEDICAL DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS, INC.,
                             A DELAWARE CORPORATION

              ADDRESS: 16722 MILLIKAN AVENUE, IRVINE, CALIFORNIA

                              DATED: AUGUST 8, 1997






1.       LEASE TERM:  The above referenced lease is extended for one (1) year
         commencing November 1, 1998, and ending October 31, 1999.

2.       BASE RENTAL RATE: The base rental rate during the extended term shall
         be $6,750.00 per month.





AGREED:

Lessor:                                   Lessee:

Frank F. Parker                           Dental/Medical Diagnostic Systems,Inc.

  /S/ Frank Parker                          /S/ Merle Roberts
----------------------------              ----------------------------------

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

Date:   7-29-98                           Date:   7-27-98
      ----------------------                    ----------------------------
No. 82, Misc.

#### Thompson *v.*Clemmer, Corrections Director.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Marshall*and *Harold H. Greene*for respondent.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned
Chief Financial Officer of Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. (the "Company"), hereby
certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the
Company for the year ended June 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date:  September 28, 2007



By: /s/ EDWARD C. HALL
    ---------------------------
        Edward C. Hall
        Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. and
will be retained by Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
From: rneuland10@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:34:18 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,

richard Neuland

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
#### STOCK *v.*TERRENCE, STATE HOSPITAL DIRECTOR.

No. 437.

Decided December 10, 1962.

*Walter J. Holloran*for appellant.

*Louis J. Lefkowitz,*Attorney General of New York, *Paxton Blair,*Solicitor General, and *Joseph J. Rose,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Cae IW24/j/ Page 1 of |
LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION hEC-1034-L6 sep 0 2/01
WUBLIOONET Pe aT, .
As of: September 02, 2011

Received: August 20, 2011
Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION Posted: September 02, 2011

Tracking No. 80¢e6304
‘(Comments Due: September 30, 2011
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0017
Requirement for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers to Provide Coverage of

Preventive Services under the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0017-0038
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services
under Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Amendment

Document: IRS-2010-0017-0170
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

known 8! .
esac Submitter Information

Address: 10502-1020
Submitter's Representative: NARAL Pro-Choice America

General Comment

I strongly support the new policy requiring health-insurance plans to cover birth control without a
copay, CMS-9992-IFC2, Thank you for this important improvement to women’s health care.

I also want you to know that I am concerned that certain religious employers may be allowed to
opt out of the requirements. All women should have access to contraceptive coverage, regardless
of where they work,

This policy finally should make near-universal access to birth control
a reality for all women who use it.

Improving women's access to birth control is positive in so many ways.
A woman who can plan when to have a family is able to participate in
society more fully. Allowing women to space their pregnancies
contributes to healthy childbearing. And ultimately, fewer unintended
pregnancies can reduce the need for abortion.

Thank you for following science-based recommendations and making
women's health a priority.

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectlId=09000.,, 9/2/2011
From: slusst@neo.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:23:24 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,

Thomas Sluss

, 44720-4913
#### Charles W. Cooke, by Guardian, Respondent, v. The Lalance-Grosjean Manufacturing Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order denying new trial reversed, and new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.;

Cullen, J., not sitting.