alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.41.2


Schedule identifying  substantially identical agreements by PanAmSat Corporation
("PanAmSat") in favor of each of the following persons, to the form of Indemnity
Agreement constituting Exhibit 10.41 to PanAmSat  International Systems,  Inc.'s
Quarterly  Report  on Form  10-Q  for  the  period  ended  September  30,  1996.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                      Name
                                      ----

                                Charles H. Noski
                              Frederick A. Landman
                              Patrick J. Costello
                               Steven D. Dorfman
                                John J. Higgins
                                Ted G. Westerman
                              Dennis F. Hightower
                                 James M. Hoak
                             Joseph R. Wright, Jr.
                                Michael T. Smith
                               Lourdes Saralegui
                                 Carl A. Brown
                               Kenneth N. Heintz
                               Robert a. Bednarek
                               James W. Cuminale
                                David P. Berman
                               Roxanne S. Austin
Before the Second Division,

July 21,1966

No. P66/163. —

#### Thoresen, Inc., and Rohner Gehrig & Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protest 64/16113 (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of lawn sprinklers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *The Durst Mfg. Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(50 CCPA 56, C.A.D. 820), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: keedesign@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:30:26 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.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Ellis

Mechanicsburg, PA 17050
No. 61527.

#### The Best Foods, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 301907-K and 301908-K (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

Plaintiff having raised no objection, the motion was granted on the ground that the protests were prematurely filed.
From: NancyFayGates@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Coverage of Preventive Care

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:59:00 AM

 I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you 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 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 religiouslyrun 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: brian.devriendt@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:03:10 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,

Brian DeVriendt

Croswell, MI 48422
Exhibit 10.56


 


AMENDMENT NO. 6

TO

ACTINIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 2013 AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK PLAN


 


Pursuant to Section 14 of the 2013 Amended and Restated Stock
Plan, as amended (the “Plan”) of Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”), the Board of Directors
of the Company has duly adopted a resolution, conditioned upon approval by the stockholders of the Company, approving this Amendment
No. 5 to the Plan to increase the total number of shares of common stock, par value $.001 per share, of the Company (the “Common
Stock”) reserved and available for issuance under the Plan as follows:


 


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



 


“Subject to the provisions of Section 14 of the
Plan, the maximum aggregate number of Shares reserved for issuance to Participants under the Plan is 17,750,000, and the maximum
aggregate number of Shares that may be granted in the form of Incentive Stock Options is 17,750,000. The Shares may be authorized,
but unissued, or reacquired Common Stock. If an award should expire or become unexercisable for any reason without having been
exercised in full, or is surrendered pursuant to an Option Exchange Program, the unpurchased Shares that were subject thereto shall,
unless the Plan shall have been terminated, become available for future grant under the Plan. In addition, any Shares of Common
Stock which are retained by the Company upon exercise of an award in order to satisfy the exercise or purchase price for such award
or any withholding taxes due with respect to such exercise or purchase shall be treated as not issued and shall continue to be
available under the Plan. Shares issued under the Plan and later repurchased by the Company pursuant to any repurchase right which
the Company may have shall not be available for future grant under the Plan.”


 


		2.	All other terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain
unchanged and in full force and effect as written.



 


		3.	A majority in voting interest of the stockholders present
in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting of stockholders at which this Amendment No. 5 was considered, has duly
approved this Amendment No. 5 to the Plan.



 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 5 to the Plan
is made effective this 14  day of March, 2018.


 


	 	 	ACTINIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/
Sandesh Seth – Chairman and CEO
Sample Id P5018 P5018 P5018 5018Medel P5018 P5018 P5018 5018Medel MW P5018 P5018 P5018 5018Medel P5018 P5018 P5018 5018Medelarea% area% area% area% normal normal normal normal Ai/Mi Ai/Mi Ai/Mi Ai/Mi Ai*Mi Ai*Mi Ai*Mi Ai*Miamine 1.036 1.100 1.078 1.071 1.426 1.507 1.488 1.474 217 0.0066 0.0070 0.0069 0.0068 309 327 323 319amine+1EO 1.065 1.126 1.111 1.101 1.466 1.543 1.534 1.514 261 0.0056 0.0059 0.0059 0.0058 382 402 400 395amine+2EO 0.774 0.784 0.782 0.780 1.065 1.074 1.080 1.073 305 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 325 327 329 327amine+3EO 1.092 1.093 1.109 1.098 1.503 1.498 1.531 1.511 349 0.0043 0.0043 0.0044 0.0043 524 522 534 527amine+4EO 1.548 1.543 1.542 1.544 2.131 2.114 2.129 2.125 393 0.0054 0.0054 0.0054 0.0054 837 830 836 834amine+5EO 2.036 2.082 2.078 2.065 2.802 2.853 2.869 2.841 437 0.0064 0.0065 0.0066 0.0065 1224 1246 1253 1241amine+6EO 2.729 2.736 2.705 2.723 3.756 3.749 3.735 3.747 481 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 0.0078 1806 1802 1795 1801amine+7EO 3.341 3.308 3.301 3.317 4.599 4.533 4.557 4.563 525 0.0088 0.0086 0.0087 0.0087 2413 2378 2391 2394amine+8EO 4.114 3.966 4.024 4.035 5.663 5.435 5.556 5.551 569 0.0100 0.0096 0.0098 0.0098 3220 3091 3159 3157amine+9EO 4.727 4.732 4.768 4.742 6.506 6.484 6.583 6.524 613 0.0106 0.0106 0.0107 0.0106 3987 3973 4033 3998amine+10EO 5.371 5.334 5.284 5.330 7.393 7.309 7.295 7.332 657 0.0113 0.0111 0.0111 0.0112 4855 4800 4791 4815amine +11EO 5.571 5.570 5.569 5.570 7.668 7.633 7.689 7.663 701 0.0109 0.0109 0.0110 0.0109 5373 5348 5387 5370amine+12EO 5.579 5.682 5.562 5.608 7.679 7.786 7.679 7.715 745 0.0103 0.0105 0.0103 0.0104 5719 5798 5719 5745amine+13 EO 5.446 5.461 5.471 5.459 7.496 7.483 7.553 7.511 789 0.0095 0.0095 0.0096 0.0095 5912 5902 5957 5924amine+14 EO 5.037 5.063 5.045 5.048 6.933 6.938 6.965 6.945 833 0.0083 0.0083 0.0084 0.0083 5773 5777 5800 5783amine+15 EO 4.914 4.985 4.907 4.935 6.764 6.831 6.775 6.790 877 0.0077 0.0078 0.0077 0.0077 5930 5989 5939 5953amine+16 EO 4.346 4.364 4.312 4.341 5.982 5.980 5.953 5.972 921 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 5508 5506 5481 5498amine+17 EO 3.923 3.940 3.918 3.927 5.400 5.399 5.409 5.403 965 0.0056 0.0056 0.0056 0.0056 5209 5208 5218 5212amine+18 EO 3.375 3.475 3.398 3.416 4.645 4.762 4.691 4.700 1009 0.0046 0.0047 0.0047 0.0047 4686 4803 4732 4741amine+19 EO 2.809 2.790 2.761 2.787 3.866 3.823 3.812 3.834 1053 0.0037 0.0036 0.0036 0.0036 4070 4025 4013 4036amine+20EO 2.102 2.062 2.040 2.068 2.893 2.826 2.816 2.845 1097 0.0026 0.0026 0.0026 0.0026 3173 3099 3089 3120amine+21EO 1.073 1.046 0.926 1.015 1.477 1.433 1.278 1.396 1141 0.0013 0.0013 0.0011 0.0012 1685 1635 1458 1593amine+22EO 0.430 0.471 0.434 0.445 0.592 0.645 0.599 0.612 1185 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 701 765 710 725amine+23EO 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.261 0.293 0.360 0.422 0.359 1229 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 360 443 519 44172.651 72.976 72.431 72.686 100.000 100.000 100.000 100.000Mn657 656 655 656Mw 740 740 739 739<500 14 14 14 14<1000 91 91 91 91
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #18191 and #18192; California Disaster Number CA-00388]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of California dated 09/22/2023. *Incident:*
                         Tropical Storm Hilary. *Incident Period:*
                         08/19/2023 through 08/21/2023.
 DATES: Issued on 09/22/2023. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         11/21/2023. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         06/24/2024.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     Riverside *Contiguous Counties:*
                     California Imperial, Orange, San Bernardino, San Diego *Arizona:*
                     La Paz The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere
5.000Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere
8.000Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
2.375Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.375*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.375
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 18191 8 and for economic injury is 18192 0. The States which received an EIDL Declaration # is Arizona, California. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Isabella Guzman, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2023-21187 Filed 9-27-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
(R.D. 11500)

#### Inter-Maritime Fwdg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 774589, etc.

(Decided March 14, 1968)

*Tompkins & Tompkins*for the plaintiff.

*Edwin L. *Weisl, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

*796Rao, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed on schedule A, attached hereto and made a part of the decision hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, Defendant, that the automobiles specified on the invoices accompanying the entries covered by the above-named reappraisement appeals, that were appraised at a value of $1240.00 each or $1469.00 each, net, (Canadian dollars), consist of automobiles manufactured in England, and imported into the United States from Canada prior to February 27, 1958.

> That there was no “foreign value”, or “export value”, or “United States value”, as defined in Section 402(c), (d), and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, for the automobiles under appeal at the time of exportation thereof.

> That in determining the “cost of production” value as defined in Section 402(f) of said Act, the Appraiser included in his above value of $1240 each or $1469.00 each net, a cost representing Canadian excise taxes, as well as a cost representing Canadian sales taxes as specified below. That said Canadian excise taxes and sales taxes were paid to the Canadian government prior to exportation to the United States, but they were refunded after exportation, under the same circumstances and conditions involved in the cases of *John V. Carr &*Son, *Inc.*v. *United*States, Reap. Dec. 10442, *Frank P. Dow Co.*v. *United*States, Reap. Dec. 10891, and *Inter-Maritime Forwarding Co., Inc.*v. *United*States, Reap. Dec. 10666, and that the records in said *John V. Carr & Son, Inc.*case, in said *Frank P. Dow Co.*case, and in said *Inter-Maritime Forwarding Co., Inc.*case may be incorporated as a part of the record in this case.

> Plaintiff limits its appeal to the claim that said excise taxes and said sales taxes should not be included as a part of the cost of production dutiable value.

Upon the agreed facts and the records in the cited cases, which are incorporated herein, I find cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the automobiles covered by these appeals for reappraisement and appraised at a value of $1,240 each or $1,469 each, net (Canadian dollars), and that such values are the appraised values of $1,240 each or $1,469 each net (Canadian dollars) less a cost representing Canadian excise taxes of $230 or $140.78 (Canadian dollars), respectively, as well as a cost representing Canadian sales taxes of $95 or $93.85 (Canadian dollars), respectively.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
From: bcwain@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:13:05 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,

Christine Wainwright

Saint George, UT 84790
SHERMAN CO

GILLIAM CO

GRANT CO

BAKER CO 

WASHINGTON 

OREGON 

PA

C I F I C

O

C

E

A

N 

Boardman

Heppner

Junction

Maryhill Arlington

Rufus

Biggs

Cecil

Wasco

Morgan

Ione Olex

Moro

Lexington

Grass

Valley

Heppner La Grande

Condon Ruggs

Kent

Hardman

Ukiah

Mayville

Shaniko

Fossil Dale

Clarno Antelope

Spray Service Monument Creek

Sumpter Kimberly Kimberly Hamilton

Long Creek Richmond

Fox

Beech Creek Austin

Mitchell Bates

Prairie City Dayville

Mount John

Vernon Day Unity

Canyon City

Prineville

Logdell

Post

Paulina

Seneca

Izee

Suplee Silvies

UMITILLA COUNION CO

MO COUNTY RROW

GRANT COUNTY 

 WASCO COUNTY 

JEFFERSON COUNTY 

WHE CELER OUNTY 

CROOK COUNTY 

Deschutes River 

River 

Columbia 

Fork 

South 

Fork 

John 

North 

Fork 

Middle 

North 

River 

Fork 

nJoh

Day 

Rive

Day 

r 

10 0 10 20 Miles 

10 0 10 20 Kilometers 

N
 

W E
 

S
 

OREGON Astoria 

30 

26 101 Pendleton Portland 84 The Tillamook Dalles 

197 395 84 5 97 

Salem 26 Baker

John Day Basin John Day Basin City Newport Albany Madras Planning Planning

26 Area

20 John 

Prineville Day 26 

Eugene Florence Bend Prineville Vale 

District 20 395 

Coos Bay Burns
 

Roseburg
 

5 

395 95 97 

Grants Pass 

101 Medford Klamath 

Falls Lakeview 199 

112 

GRANT COUNTY
 

HARNEY COUNTY
 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

PRINEVILLE DISTRICT 

John Day Basin
 

Resource Management Plan
 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement
 

2008 

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy, 

reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other 

data. Original data were compiled from various sources. This information may not 

meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was developed through 

digital means and may be updated without notification. 

M07-09-01:4-08-08 

Millican

Brothers

84 

74 

19 

97 

206 

206 244 

97 218 218 

19 

207 395 

293 

402 

207 19 

7 

395 26 

26 

26 26 

380 

27 

395 

20 

LEGEND

Land to be Managed to Protect

 Wilderness Characteristics 

Wilderness Study Area 

Planning Area Boundary 

Administered Land

 Bureau of Land Management

 Forest Service

 John Day Fossil Beds

 National Monument

 Other Federal

 State

 Private or Other 

63 

Map 7: Wilderness Characteristics