alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.32
 SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT
 Agreement Company Purchaser
  Securities Act
  ARTICLE I.
DEFINITIONS
 Definitions
 Action
 Affiliate
 Board of Directors
 Business Day
 Closing
 Closing Date




---



##### 



Commission
 Common Stock
 Common Stock Equivalents
 Conversion Price
 Notes Exhibit A
 Exchange Act
 GAAP
 Maximum Rate
 Person
 Pro Rata Portion
 Proceeding
 Required Approvals
 Rule 144
 SEC Reports
 2




---



##### 



Securities
 Securities Act
 Subscription Amount
 Subsidiary Schedule
3.1(a)
 To the knowledge of the Company
 Trading Day
 Trading Market
 Transaction Documents
 Transfer Agent
 Underlying Shares
 Warrants Exhibit C
 Warrant Shares
 3




---



##### 



ARTICLE II.
PURCHASE AND SALE
 Closing
 Deliveries
        Subsequent Closings
 4




---



##### 



Deliveries at Subsequent Closing
     ARTICLE III.
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
 Representations and Warranties of the Company
 Organization and Qualification
 5




---



##### 



Authorization; Enforcement
 No Conflicts
 Representations and Warranties of the Purchaser
 Organization; Authority
 6




---



##### 



Own Account
 Purchaser Status
 Experience of the Purchaser
 General Solicitation
 Certain Fees
 7




---



##### 



Purchaser Opportunity
 ARTICLE IV.
OTHER AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES
 Transfer Restrictions
    8




---



##### 



Acknowledgment of Dilution
 Conversion and Exercise Procedures
 ARTICLE V.
MISCELLANEOUS
 Entire Agreement
 Notices nd
 9




---



##### 



Amendments; Waivers
 Headings
 Successors and Assigns
 No Third-Party Beneficiaries
 Governing Law
 10




---



##### 



Survival
 Execution
 Severability
 Replacement of Securities
 Remedies
 Payment Set Aside
 11




---



##### 



Usury Maximum Rate
 Saturdays, Sundays, Holidays, etc
 Construction
 WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL . IN ANY ACTION, SUIT, OR PROCEEDING IN ANY JURISDICTION
BROUGHT BY ANY PARTY AGAINST ANY OTHER
 12




---



##### 



PARTY, THE PARTIES EACH KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY, TO THE GREATEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW, HEREBY ABSOLUTELY, UNCONDITIONALLY, IRREVOCABLY AND EXPRESSLY WAIVES FOREVER TRIAL
BY JURY.
 (Signature Pages Follow)
 13




---



##### 



T3 MOTION, INC.
    
    
    
    Address for Notice:
2990 Airway Avenue
Costa Mesa, California 92626By:
    
    /s/ Kelly J. Anderson
    
    
    
    Fax: (714) 619-3616Name: Kelly J. AndersonTitle: Chief Financial OfficerWith a copy to (which shall not constitute notice):Richardson & Patel LLP10900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500Los Angeles, California 90024Facsimile: (310) 208-1154Attention: Ryan S. Hong
 
 14




---



##### 



Name of Purchaser:
    
    Ki Nam
 Signature of Authorized Signatory of Purchaser:
 Email Address of Authorized Signatory:
 Facsimile Number of Authorized Signatory:Address for Notice of Purchaser:
     15
From: nancyfadeley@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:40:33 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,

Nancy Fadeley

Lilburn, GA 30047
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIHAI75N93023R00003: Pre-clinical Models of Infectious Diseases—Task Area A.                    

*Date:*                         October 27-November 1, 2023.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3E70A, Rockville, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Annie Walker-Abbey, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3E70A, Rockville, MD 20852, 240-627-3390,                         *aabbey@niaid.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 20, 2023.

Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-20877 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:38:35 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,

John Pace

West Monroe, LA 71291
Case No. 12,872.

#### SIMMS v. TEMPLEMAN.

[5 Cranch, C. C. 163.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term, 1837.

New Trial — Mistake bv Jury in' Taking Papers.

A new trial will not be granted because the jury, by mistake, took out with them the plaintiff’s account, if it be withdrawn from them in a few minutes afterwards, by order of the court.

This was an attachment under the Maryland act of 1793 (chapter 56). The garnishee iTempleman] pleaded nulla bona, and non assumpsit by the defendant [MeCleary]. The plaintiff’s account, for work and labor, was annexed, by a wafer, to the warrant of the justice of the peace to the clerk to issue the attachment; and upon the back of the warrant was written the plaintiff’s short note of his cause of action, which stands in the place of a declaration, and upon which the issue was joined upon the plea of non assumpsit. The jury took out with them the short note, to which were annexed the warrant and account, and an affidavit of the plaintiff, made in compliance with the act of 1795 (chapter 56), The account had been proved by a witness, and the amount had been stated to the jury, and was also stated in the short note.

A few minutes after the jury had retired, Mr. Marbury, for plaintiff, informed the court that the account had been thus, by mistake, taken out by the jury, and requested the court to send to the jury for the paper, which they did, and informed them that they had taken it by mistake; and it was thus withdrawn from them.

The verdict being for the plaintiff, Mr. C. Cox, for defendant, moved for a new trial, because the account had been thus taken out by the jury.

But

THE COURT

(MORSELL, Circuit Judge, absent)

refused.
From: iconsbymark@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:21:16 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,

Mark Sassani

Mount Carmel, PA 17851
No. 68385.

protests 63/11215, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### O’Browne *&*Company, Ltd., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of rayon labels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Standard Commodities Import & Export Corp.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 27, C.D. 2409), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: czrella@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:07:32 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,

Cindy Zuercher

Gresham, OR 97030
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         214,314
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       8,933,710
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    641,412
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    105,539,751
<ALLOWANCE>                                    211,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             121,469,462
<DEPOSITS>                                  80,272,119
<SHORT-TERM>                                20,013,302
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,493,996
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,897
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,674,148
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             121,469,462
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              4,516,574
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               48,896
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               195,918
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             4,516,574
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,163,142
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,559,804
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,956,770
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   25,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,163,631
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                790,792
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     490,902
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   490,092
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.03
<LOANS-NON>                                    842,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   159,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               260,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               186,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              211,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           211,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         73,550
        

</TABLE>
~v.· I 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

i 3 2015 

HEAFi!NG DOCKET 

In The Matter Of: 

NORTHEASTERN AVIATION 

CORPORATION 

Respondent 

) 

) DocketNo. FAA-2015-0206 

) 

) 

) Case No. 2011EA110045 

) Assigned: Judge J .E. Sullivan 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

Respondent, hereby notifies the United States Department of Transportation, Office of 

Hearings, and the Complainant, that it shall be represented in the above-stated action by the 

attorneys listed below. All communications, notices, pleadings, or documents are respectfully 

requested to be forwarded as follows: 

Edward J. Longosz, II 

Evelyn D. Sahr 

Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC 

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Suite 1200 

Washington, DC 20006 

Telephone: 202-659-6619 

Facsimile: 202-659-6699 

By: 

Respectfully submitted, 

Edward J. Longosz, II 

Evelyn D. Sahr 

Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC 

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 1200 

Washington, DC 20006 

Telephone: 202-659-6619 

Facsimile: 202-659-6699 

E-mail: elongosz@eckertseamans.com 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this ~day of March, 2015, copies of the foregoing Notice of 

Appearance was sent by e-mail and Federal Express as follows: 

Original & One Copy- By Federal Express 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

One Copy - By Mail 

Mr. Daniel Kohlmeyer 

Complainant's Counsel 

Office of Regional Counsel, Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

Tel: 718-553-3266 

Fax: 718-995-5699 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Tel: 202-366-6941 

Fax: 202-366-7537 

Edward J. Longosz, II 

2
H. Res. 364

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 3, 2007.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 

shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 

1592) to provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for 

other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 

the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 

of rule XXI. The amendment in the nature of a substitute 

recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed 

in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in the report 

of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 

shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 

considered as read. All points of order against the bill, as 

amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage 

without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate 

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 

minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) 

one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 
2

•HRES 364 EH 

SEC. 2. During consideration of H.R. 1592 pursuant to 

this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous 

question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the 

bill to such time as may be designated by the Speaker. 

Attest:

Clerk.