alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
breslow091212.htm






  





  











  













 


DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTE


 


 







 


 



Exhibit 10.80









 







 


 


$300,000                                                                           Date:  September 27, 2012


 


 







 


 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned jointly and severally promise to pay to the order of Warren Breslow, the sum of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars and no/100 ($300,000.00), together with interest of 10% per annum on the unpaid balance.


 


 


The entire principal and any accrued interest shall be fully and immediately payable UPON DEMAND of any holder thereof.


 


 







 


 


 

 


 


 


”Borrower”


 


Aura Systems, Inc.

















____________________


Melvin Gagerman


Chief Executive Officer







 


Dated: September 27, 2012
Before the First Division,

August 22, 1966

No. P66/195.

#### Tokyo Trading Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protest 65/11152 (New York).

Oliver, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of vinyl ornaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Zenith Novelty Co. et al.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 215, Abstract 67011), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
BAR OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Ruby S. Redshaw has filed a motion for admission to the Bar of the State of Montana

pursuant to Rule V of the Rules for Admission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Adrnissions

Administrator of the State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Cornmission on

Character and Fitness has certified that Redshaw has provided the necessary documentation

and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to adrnission on rnotion under Rule V.

Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and

completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Adrnissions

Administrator, Ruby S. Redshaw may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of

Montana. Arrangements for swearing in may be made by contacting the office of the Clerk

of the Montana Supreme Court, and may be conducted by Hon. Leslie Halligan. Rule X.D.,

Rules of Admission.

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and to the State

Bar of Montana.

LYN--

DATED this f gl day of January, 2021.
2

Justices
EXHIBIT
32.1


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Danny
Elbaz, the President, Principal Executive Officer and Director of The Mobile
Star Corp. (“Mobile Star”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely
for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form
10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and  results of operations
of the Company.





(1) The
Report fully complies 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.




THE
      MOBILE STAR CORP.By:
                /s/ Danny
      ElbazName:
                Danny
      ElbazTitle:
                President
      and Director(Principal
      Executive Officer)





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.
#### In re Bowie. Amy Robinson, appellee, v. Griffin E. Yeatman et al., appellants.

Filed October 14, 1921.

No. 21935.

Appeal from the district court for Adams county: William A. Dilworth, Judos.

*Affirmed.*

*James & Danley,*for appellants.

*Harry 8.*Dungcm, *Philip H. Fuller*and *James E. Addie, contra.*

*889Heard before Morrissey, C.J., Rose, Aldrich and Elansburg, JJ., Allen and Redick, District Judges.

Redick, District Judge.

After a careful and painstaking reading and study oí' the record and evidence in this case, we are forced to the conclusion that the judgment of the district court is right, and the same is

Affirmed.
No. 68402.

protests 62/ 14046, etc. (New York).

#### Excelsior Accordions, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chord organs and parts thereof similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Excelsior Accordions, Inc.*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 148, C.D. 2328), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Henry Valencia, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 539]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered December 9, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of grand larceny in the fourth degree and two counts of criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and *275sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 2 to 4 years on each larceny conviction and 1 year on each criminal mischief conviction, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court properly discharged a juror as grossly unqualified (CPL 270.35) upon the basis of its own observation that the juror had been sleeping during testimony and the juror’s admission that she had been sleeping and did not know how much testimony she had missed *(People v Russell,*112 AD2d 451; *see, People v Rodriguez,*71 NY2d 214, 219). Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Tom, JJ.
#### Ozias H. Gibbs, Respondent, v. Simeon B. Manley, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Bradley, J.
Case No. 12,901.

#### SINGER v. WILSON.

Patents — Practice—Oyer.

’ Oyer of letters patent referred to in the declaration is not demandable as of right; being matter of record, the defendant can obtain them if he desires them.

[Cited in Law, Pat. Dig. 590. to the point .•stated above. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
No. 455, Misc.

#### Taylor *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Lars
Pearl, President, Chief Executive Officer and  Chief Financial Officer
of Aurora Gold Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.
            The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
      September 30, 2009 which this certification accompanies 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:
            January 27,
      2010
            BY:
            /s/ Lars
      PearlLars
      PearlPresident,
      CEO and CFO





This
certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 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 the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
From: tinyzoo@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:47:12 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,

Laurene Wells

Newberg, OR 97132
From: jbrooks1940@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:23:30 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 Brooka

, 33408-4111
No. P69/43.

protest 67/50851 (Los Angeles).

#### Yamaha Int. Corp. *v.*United States,

Maletz, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of chord organs similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Excelsior Ac*cordions, *Inc.*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 148, C.D. 2328), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 58650.

protest 231122-K (New York).

#### Albert H. Singer China Fur Corp. and W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N. Y., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Mollison, J.,

dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480, *supra.*
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 18 

Expressing disapproval by the House of Representatives of the totalization 

agreement between the United States and Mexico signed by the Commissioner of Social Security and the Director General of the Mexican Social 

Security Institute on June 29, 2004. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mrs. 

CUBIN, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. FEENEY, and Mr. DEAL of Georgia) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Ways and Means 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing disapproval by the House of Representatives of 

the totalization agreement between the United States 

and Mexico signed by the Commissioner of Social Security and the Director General of the Mexican Social 

Security Institute on June 29, 2004. 

Whereas a totalization agreement between the United States 

and Mexico was signed by the Commissioner of Social Security and the Director General of the Mexican Social Security Institute on June 29, 2004; 

Whereas a totalization agreement between the United States 

and Mexico negatively impacts the Social Security system 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 18 IH 

of the United States and puts America’s seniors at risk; 

and 

Whereas upon transmittal of such agreement to the Congress, 

under section 233(e)(2) of the Social Security Act, such 

agreement is subject to disapproval by either House of 

the Congress: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives, pursu2 ant to section 233(e)(2) of the Social Security Act, hereby 

3 disapproves the totalization agreement establishing total4 ization arrangements between the social security system 

5 established by title II of such Act and the social security 

6 system of Mexico, signed by the Commissioner of Social 

7 Security and the Director General, Mexican Social Secu8 rity Institute, on June 29, 2004. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
★

H. Res. 353 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

June 26, 2008. 

Whereas the annual commemoration of Men’s Health Week 

during the week preceding Father’s Day gives new reason 

to consider the critical need to improve detection and 

treatment of prostate cancer; 

Whereas prostate cancer now strikes at least one in six American men, with African-American men having a 60 percent higher incidence rate than Caucasian men and a 

mortality rate twice as high; 

Whereas each year more than 230,000 American men are 

newly diagnosed with prostate cancer, more than 

1,500,000 men have biopsies, and around 30,000 men 

fall prey to this potential killer; 

Whereas it is important for men to take advantage of prostate cancer screening exams in order to detect the disease 

at the earliest opportunity, when it is still curable; 

Whereas a recent study funded by the National Cancer Institute demonstrated that the most common available methods of detecting prostate cancer, the PSA blood test and 

physical exams, are not foolproof—imaging would be another beneficial factor in the diagnosis and treatment of 

prostate cancer; 
2 

•HRES 353 EH1S 

Whereas the use of advanced imaging technologies to detect 

and treat prostate cancer could be beneficial for eliminating unnecessary and costly medical procedures that 

increase psychological and emotional trauma for American men and their families; 

Whereas the lack of accurate imaging tools means that biopsies can miss cancer even when multiple samples are 

taken, and current treatments—either radical surgery or 

radiation—can leave 50 to 80 percent of men incontinent 

or impotent or both; and 

Whereas advanced imaging technologies could be combined 

with treatment tools to perform image-guided, minimally 

invasive and precisely targeted interventions, which will 

be performed in outpatient clinics with minimal discomfort, complications and costs and which will end the fear, 

pain, suffering and costs that prostate cancer causes men 

and their families: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that there should be increased support for research and 

development of advanced imaging technologies for prostate 

cancer detection and treatment. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                           5
<CIK>                                               0001037189
<NAME>                                   Smith Barney Westport Futures Fund L.P

<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                      JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                        JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                      116,004,457
<SECURITIES>                                                 11,883,050
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   337,062
<ALLOWANCES>                                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            128,224,569
<PP&E>                                                                0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              128,224,569
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         2,440,712
<BONDS>                                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                                           0
<COMMON>                                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                                  125,783,857
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                128,224,569
<SALES>                                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              9,090,809
<CGS>                                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              3,416,964
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               5,673,845
<INCOME-TAX>                                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  5,673,845
<EPS-BASIC>                                                     51.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         0


</TABLE>
Before the Second Division

March 31, 1964

No. 68405.

protest 62/3217

#### Arthur J. Fritz *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Ford, Judge:

The above case was tried in conjunction with, but not consolidated therein, protest 62/3245, decided concurrently with the issuance of this order and reported as *Arthur J. Fritz & Co., Inc.*v. *United States,*52 Cust. Ct. 61, C.D. 2437.

An examination of the official papers in this matter indicates that the merchandise was invoiced as “Wool Bag Bugs.” Said merchandise purports to be identical with that involved in C.D. 2437, *supra.*However, such designation is insufficient to establish the merchandise to be in chief value of wool.

Accordingly, in the interests of justice, this ease should be restored to the next calendar of the court to be held at Seattle, Wash., for the purpose of establishing the component material of chief value.

Order will issue accordingly.
From: newstart4ann@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:14:20 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,

Ann Redding

Minneapolis, MN 55419