alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Filed by Automated Filing Serivces Inc. (604) 609-0244 - K-Tronik International Corp. - Exhibit 10.19




 Fair Trade Committee 

  Person in Charge: 

  Reviewed by: 

  Approved by: 

 Supplementary Agreement for Renewal of Agreement (Trade
  Period)

  May 29, 2002 


To Hanvit Bank


	 	Taewoong Chung / CEO
	 	K-Tronik Asia Corp.
	 	656, Munhyeng-ri, Opo-myeon, Gwangju-si, Gyeonggi-do
	 	Contractor: Taewoong Chung
	 	Address:656, Munhyeng-ri, Opo-myeon, Gwangju, Gyeonggi-do
	 	Tel( )
	 	 
	 	Joint Surety: Taewoong Chung
	 	Address:111-1601, Lotte APT. Guro5-dong, Guro-gu, Seoul
	 	Tel( )
	 	 
	 	Joint Surety: Taewoong Chung / Daekyung Ent Co., Ltd.
	 	Address:442 Gwangmyeong Housing Complex, Haan3-dong,
	 	Gwangmyeong, Gyeonggi-do
	 	Tel( )


 Supplementing the Agreement (for the loan for the purchase
  fund of a company) dated June 4 of 2001, the both parties agree to confirm the
  renewal of the Agreement (trade period) as follows. 

 1. (Limited) Amount Loaned before Renewal: 428 million KWR 

  2. Amount Partially Repaid (or, of which limit has been reduced): KWR 

  3. Loaned Amount Applied for Period Renewal: 428 million KWR 

  4. Applied Rate of Interest: Annually, Standard Money Rate + 3.01% per Total
  Limited Amount (Agreed Service Charge:   %) 5. Period (Trade Period)
  after Renewal: by May 29, 2003 

 Hanvit Bank
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 19, 2014

NO. 03-13-00307-CR

Marc Trace Wyatt, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 21ST DISTRICT COURT OF LEE COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs 

is made.
**Exhibit 10.3**

** **

**FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE**

**TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION**

**1997 LONG-TERM EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN**

 

**               **THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE TUESDAY MORNINGCORPORATION 1997 LONG-TERM EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN (this “Amendment”) is made andadopted by Tuesday Morning Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),effective as of July 28, 2005.

**PRELIMINARYSTATEMENTS**

                A.            The stockholders of the Company have approved, and theCompany has adopted, the Tuesday Morning Corporation 1997 Long-Term EquityIncentive Plan (the “1997 Plan”). Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have themeanings ascribed to them in the 1997 Plan.

                B.            The compensation committee of the board of directors ofthe Company desires to exercise its power to modify the 1997 Plan by defining “FairMarket Value” under the 1997 Plan in a manner that is consistent with certainguidance given by the Internal Revenue Service regarding what would be deemed areasonable methodology for determining the “fair market value” of stock underlyingan option to purchase stock with respect to all options granted on or after July28, 2005.

**AMENDMENT**

                NOW, THEREFORE, the 1997 Plan ishereby amended as follows:

                1.  Section 2(k)(i) is hereby amended to read asfollows in its entirety:

“(i)  the mean between the highest and lowestselling prices of the Common Stock on the date of determination or, if therehave been no sales on the date of determination but there were sales on dateswithin a reasonable period both before and after the determination date, theweighted average of the means between the highest and lowest sales on thenearest date before and the nearest date after the determination date; suchaverage is to be weighted inversely by the respective number of trading daysbetween the selling dates and the determination date.”

                2.  Section 2(k)(ii) is hereby amended to read asfollows in its entirety:

“(ii)  with respect to any security which is notlisted on any securities exchange or quoted in the NASDAQ System or theover-the-counter market, the fair value of such security as reasonablydetermined by the Board in good faith.”

                This Amendment, and the changesto the provisions of the 1997 Plan effected hereby, shall be effective as of July28, 2005 and shall apply to all options granted under the 1997 Plan on or afterJuly 28, 2005.  Except as expressly setforth herein, the 1997 Plan shall remain in full force and effect withoutfurther amendment or modification.

----

 

                IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company,acting by and through its officer hereunto duly authorized, has executed thisAmendment effective as of the date first written above.

 
|   | TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION |
|--------|-----------------------------|
|   |                        |
|   | By:                         | /s/ Loren K. Jensen |
|   |                        | Loren K. Jensen  Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer |

 

S-1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1998

<CASH>                                                       6,120,722
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               14,869,727
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  (473,724)
<INVENTORY>                                                 16,709,778
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            39,163,191
<PP&E>                                                     642,335,530
<DEPRECIATION>                                            (229,533,708)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             477,828,811
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       27,876,497
<BONDS>                                                    305,917,699
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 115,352,747
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               477,828,811
<SALES>                                                   $104,436,580
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          $104,436,580
<CGS>                                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               80,833,969
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          18,509,234
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              6,379,642
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          6,379,642
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 6,379,642
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        0
        
 

</TABLE>
No. 61658.

#### Wool Distributing Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 303875-K (Boston).

Wilson, Judge:

The merchandise at bar consists of 50 bales scoured combing wool which was assessed with duty on the basis of clean content at the rate of 27% cents per pound under paragraph 1102 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802.

At the trial, the ease was submitted on the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> Me. Ziegel: It is stipulated and agreed that the sworn weights covered by the weight certificate of Patrick Walsh, sworn weigher, represent the individual bale weights as detailed therein of the 50 bales herein, with a total gross weight of 10,963 pounds, and represent the normal increase in weight at the time of importation over the shipped weight.

> Further, that the tare of said 50 bales is 400 pounds, and that the weight return of the sworn weigher, said Walsh, may be received in evidence, and that the gross weight of 10,963 pounds may be used as the basis of reliquidation.

> Me. Sklaeoff: It is so stipulated, * * * .

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact, we hold the merchandise in question properly dutiable under paragraph 1102 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802, at the rate of 27% cents per pound of clean content on the basis of a total gross weight of 10,963 pounds with an allowance for tare.

The protest is sustained to the extent indicated. In all other respects and as to all other merchandise, all the claims are overruled.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 409

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 26 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make

corrections in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1654.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Clerk of the House of Representa3 tives shall make the following corrections in the enrollment

4 of the bill H.R. 1654:
2

HCON 409 RDS

1 (1) In section 1(b), in the item relating to sec2 tion 205 in the table of contents, insert ‘‘research

3 utilization and commercialization’’ after ‘‘Space sta4 tion’’.

5 (2) In section 2(4)—

6 (A) insert ‘‘the’’ after ‘‘commercial pro7 viders of’’; and

8 (B) strike the comma after ‘‘reusable space

9 vehicles’’.

10 (3) In section 201(b)—

11 (A) strike ‘‘the Russian Service Module,

12 other’’ and insert ‘‘any’’;

13 (B) strike ‘‘, or Russian’’ and insert ‘‘or

14 any Russian’’;

15 (C) strike ‘‘the Russian Service Module, or

16 any other Russian element in the critical path

17 or Russian launch service’’ and insert ‘‘any

18 Russian element in the critical path or any

19 Russian launch services’’; and

20 (D) strike the comma after ‘‘with the per21 manent replacement’’.

22 (4) In section 203(a)(2), strike the comma after

23 ‘‘Sciences and Applications’’.
3

HCON 409 RDS

1 (5) In the section heading of section 205, insert

2 ‘‘RESEARCH UTILIZATION AND COMMER3 CIALIZATION’’ after ‘‘SPACE STATION’’.

4 (6) In section 303, strike the comma after

5 ‘‘fullest extent feasible’’.

6 (7) In section 317(b), strike ‘‘October’’ and in7 sert ‘‘December’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 26,

2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 232 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.232
                                      Agreed to October 19, 2000        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                          Concurrent Resolution

Whereas hundreds of United States citizens travel by automobile to 
  Mexico every day;

Whereas United States automobile insurance is not valid in Mexico and 
  travellers may purchase additional insurance to cover potential 
  liability or injury while in Mexico;

Whereas in cases where additional insurance is not purchased and a 
  United States citizen is involved in an automobile accident, the 
  American will be subject to a bond requirement before being permitted 
  to return to the United States; and

Whereas in a recent incident, a United States citizen injured in an 
  automobile accident in Mexico was not transferred to a United States 
  hospital for 18 hours, even after medical personnel in Mexico 
  recommended his immediate transfer to the United States for emergency 
  treatment, until the family posted the bond set by Mexican 
  authorities: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that, in order to protect the 
safety and well-being of United States citizens travelling in Mexico, 
the President should continue to negotiate with the Government of 
Mexico to establish procedures, including a humanitarian exemption to 
Mexican bond requirements, to ensure the expedited return of United 
States citizens injured in Mexico to the United States for medical 
treatment, if necessary.
  Attest:

                          Jeff Trandahl,

                                                                       
                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
              By

                                                                       
                                                          Deputy Clerk.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
Exhibit 31.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, John Dupont,  President and Chief Executive Officer of Utilicraft Industries,
Inc. (the "registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of the registrant;

2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  report  does not  contain  any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made,  not  misleading  with  respect to the period  covered by this annual
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  report,  fairly  present in all  material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed  such  disclosure  controls and  procedures  to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, is made known to us, particularly during
the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  registrant's  disclosure  controls and
procedures  as of a date  within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions  about the  effectiveness  of
the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based  on our  evaluation  as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability  to record,  process,
summarize and report  financial data and have  identified  for the  registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 15, 2008

By: /s/ John Dupont
-------------------
 John Dupont,
 President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5
       
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1996

<CASH>                                                       4,048,580
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               14,154,700
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  (543,745)
<INVENTORY>                                                 20,246,087
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            39,881,127
<PP&E>                                                     625,353,990
<DEPRECIATION>                                            (210,880,665)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             476,465,571
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       30,493,663
<BONDS>                                                    307,905,847
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 104,364,743
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               476,465,571
<SALES>                                                    $97,529,513
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           $97,529,513
<CGS>                                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               73,763,680
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          19,171,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              5,310,631
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          5,310,631
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 5,310,631
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        0
        



</TABLE>
Before the Third Division,

September 25, 1952

No. 56873.

#### Cathay Crafts Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 174888-K (New York).

*377Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of brass silent butlers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *The Fan Co.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 42, C. D. 1261), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 53857.

#### The Thermal Syndicate, Ltd. *v.*United States,

petition 6735-R (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

An examination of the record disclosed that the merchandise was entered and appraised at list prices less a discount of 20 percent; that investigation abroad by the Government at the instigation of petitioner herein subsequently developed that due to postwar readjustment the value of the merchandise should be the list prices without the allowance of any discount; and upon collector’s appeal for reappraisement, petitioner did not controvert the new basis of valuation. After a full consideration of the record, the court was satisfied that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R EHEARING

Appellate case name: Michael Brent Brown V. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 15

- 00042

- CR

Trial court case number: B

- 140443

- R

Trial court: 163rd District Court of Orange County

Date motion filed: December 23, 2015

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is DENIED GRANTED.

Judge’s s ignature: /s/ Harvey Brown

Acting Individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Chief Justice Radack, Justices Massengale, & Brown

Date: January 21, 2016
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Sandor Grosz, the Chief Financial Officer of Technology Solutions Company, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Technology Solutions Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures, andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       Date: November 14, 2005 By: /s/ SANDOR GROSZ Sandor Grosz      Chief Financial Officer