alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.1




 Exhibit 10.1 

TERMINATION AGREEMENT 

This Termination Agreement, effective as of March 31, 2022 (this “Termination Agreement”), is entered into by and among
Sierra Lake Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Sierra Lake Sponsor LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Sponsor”). The Company and the Sponsor are collectively referred to
herein as the “Parties”. 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Sponsor entered into that certain Administrative Support
Agreement, dated September 14, 2021 (the “Administrative Support Agreement”); 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Administrative
Support Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Sponsor the sum of $10,000 per month on September 14, 2021 (the date on which the securities of the Company were first listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market, or the “Listing Date”) and
continuing monthly thereafter until the earlier of the consummation by the Company of an initial business combination or the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Company’s Registration Statement) (such earlier date, the
“Termination Date”), in exchange for the Sponsor providing the Company with certain office space, utilities and secretarial and administrative support; and 

WHEREAS, each of the Parties believes that terminating the Administrative Support Agreement and waiving any and all amounts due, from the
Listing Date to the Termination Date, from the Company to the Sponsor pursuant to the Administrative Support Agreement is in its best interests and wishes to terminate its rights and obligations thereunder. 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and provisions herein set forth, and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, each of the Parties, intending to be legally bound, hereto agrees that the Administrative Support Agreement is hereby terminated in its entirety as of the date hereof, and
none of the parties thereto will have any rights or obligations thereunder following such termination. In connection with the termination of the Administrative Support Agreement, the Sponsor hereby further agrees to waive any and all amounts due,
from the Listing Date to the Termination Date, from the Company to the Sponsor pursuant to the Administrative Support Agreement. This Termination Agreement supersedes any other oral or written agreements among the parties regarding the subject
matter hereof. 
 [Signature Page Follows] 











 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Termination Agreement as of the date set
forth above. 
  

			
	SIERRA LAKE ACQUISITION CORP.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Charles Alutto

	 Name: Charles Alutto

	 Title: Chief Executive Officer

	
	SIERRA LAKE SPONSOR LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Charles Alutto

	 Name: Charles Alutto

	 Title: Managing Member



 [Signature Page to Termination Agreement]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 19219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7268]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting on 
Safety Research Program; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Safety Research Program will hold a 
meeting on May 2, 2007, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
    Wednesday, May 2, 2007--10:30 a.m. until the conclusion of 
business.
    The Subcommittee will discuss the status of staff's efforts 
associated with the development of an integrated, long-term regulatory 
research plan. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, 
analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and 
actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Dr. 
Hossein P. Nourbakhsh (Telephone: 301-415-5622) five days prior to the 
meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. 
Electronic recordings will be permitted.
    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 
p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact 
the above-named individual at least two working days prior to the 
meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

    Dated: April 11, 2007.
Cayetano Santos,
Acting Branch Chief, ACRS.
 [FR Doc. E7-7268 Filed 4-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 20518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7857]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-301-158]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Negotiated Rate Amendment Filing

April 19, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 2, 2007, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing and approval a negotiated rate agreement amendments 
between ANR and Wisconsin Gas, L.L.C., ANR and Wisconsin Electric Power 
Company, and ANR and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.
    ANR requests that the Commission accept and approve the subject 
filing to be effective April 1, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d79192859498b9bbbeb9b284a2a7a7b8a5a397b1b2a5b4f9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="33757661707c5d5f5a5d56604643435c414773555641501d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-7857 Filed 4-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2016287EN.01001002.xml

| 8.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 31 May 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Reha Training Gesellschaft für Sport- und Unfallrehabilitation mbH v Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte eV (GEMA)

(Case C-117/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 3(1) - Directive 2006/115/EC - Article 8(2) - Concept of ‘communication to the public’ - Installation of television sets by the operator of a rehabilitation centre making it possible for patients to watch television programmes))

(2016/C 287/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Landgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Reha Training Gesellschaft für Sport- und Unfallrehabilitation mbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte eV (GEMA)

Defendant:

Intervening parties: Gesellschaft zur Verwertung von Leistungsschutzrechten mbH (GVL)

Intervening parties:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

In a case such as that in the main proceedings, in which it is alleged that the broadcast of television programmes by means of television sets that the operator of a rehabilitation centre has installed in its premises affects the copyright and related rights of a large number of interested parties, in particular, composers, songwriters and music publishers, but also performers, phonogramme producers and authors of literary works and their publishers, it must be determined whether such a situation constitutes a ‘communication to the public’, within the meaning of both Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society and Article 8(2) of Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property and in accordance with the same interpretive criteria. Furthermore, those two provisions must be interpreted as meaning that such a broadcast constitutes an act of ‘communication to the public’.

---

(1)  OJ C 198, 15.6.2015.

1

---
EXHIBIT 11
                                 TSI Incorporated
                        Computation of Per Share Earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Three Months Ended           Six Months Ended
                                            June 30, 1997            September 30, 1997
                                     -------------------------   -------------------------
                                         1997          1996          1997          1996
                                     -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                   <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>       
Primary
-------
Average shares outstanding            11,529,903    11,372,186    11,512,226    11,229,319

Net effect of dilutive stock
options, based on the treasury
stock method using average
market price                             274,004       434,371       285,099       444,637
                                     -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

Total                                 11,803,907    11,806,557    11,797,325    11,673,956

Net Earnings                         $ 1,770,616   $ 1,609,300   $ 3,252,870   $ 3,482,246

Primary per share amounts            $       .15   $       .14   $       .28   $       .30

Fully Diluted
-------------

Average shares                        11,529,903    11,372,186    11,512,226    11,229,319

Net effect of dilutive stock
options, based on the treasury
stock method using the
period-end market price, if
higher than the average market 
price                                    271,115       438,053       285,487       446,748
                                     -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

Total                                 11,801,018    11,810,239    11,797,713    11,676,067

Net Earnings                         $ 1,770,616   $ 1,609,300   $ 3,252,870   $ 3,482,246

Fully diluted per share amounts      $       .15   $       .14   $       .28   $       .30

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:13-cr-75

Roosvert Perez-Lorenzo 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 23) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the indictment, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on that count. The court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: June 18, 2013 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:13-cr-00075-JLG Doc #: 25 Filed: 06/18/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# Official Journal C 204/20 A

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 204 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4820 August 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 204

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4820 August 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 204/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2005/C 204/2 | Amendment by France of public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Ajaccio, Bastia, Calvi and Figari, and Lyon, Marseilles, Nice and Paris (Orly) (1) | 2 |
| 2005/C 204/3 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3872 — United Services Group/Solvus) (1) | 3 |
| 2005/C 204/4 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3770 — Lufthansa/Swiss) (1) | 3 |
| 2005/C 204/5 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3854 — IPIC/OMV/JV) (1) | 4 |
| 2005/C 204/6 | Summary information communicated by the Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 of 23 December 2003 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products | 5 |
| 2005/C 204/7 | Imposition by Finland of a public service obligation relating to the scheduled air service on the Helsinki-Varkaus route (1) | 19 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2005/C 204/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2005/C 204/2

Amendment by France of public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Ajaccio, Bastia, Calvi and Figari, and Lyon, Marseilles, Nice and Paris (Orly) (1)

2

2005/C 204/3

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3872 — United Services Group/Solvus) (1)

3

2005/C 204/4

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3770 — Lufthansa/Swiss) (1)

3

2005/C 204/5

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3854 — IPIC/OMV/JV) (1)

4

2005/C 204/6

Summary information communicated by the Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 of 23 December 2003 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products

5

2005/C 204/7

Imposition by Finland of a public service obligation relating to the scheduled air service on the Helsinki-Varkaus route (1)

19

---

| | III   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 204/8 | Call for proposals — DG EAC No 45/05 — Implementation and Awareness raising action on enhanced cooperation in Vocational Education and Training | 21 |

III   Notices

Commission

2005/C 204/8

Call for proposals — DG EAC No 45/05 — Implementation and Awareness raising action on enhanced cooperation in Vocational Education and Training

21

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Chief Judge Moon, Judges Coleman and Fitzpatrick Argued at Richmond, Virginia

JESSIE LEE BLACKWELL, s/k/a JESSE LEE BLACKWELL v. Record No. 1992-94-2 MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY JUDGE SAM W. COLEMAN III COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA JANUARY 23, 1996

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY William R. Shelton, Judge A.R. Bowles, IV (Bowles and Bowles, on brief), for appellant. Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; Robert B. Condon, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Jessie Lee Blackwell was convicted in a bench trial of statutory burglary. Blackwell contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. Because the defendant failed to preserve the sufficiency of the evidence issue for appeal in accordance with Rule 5A:18, we do not address the merits of the issue. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction. At the close of the Commonwealth's case, counsel for the codefendant moved to "strike all the evidence," and counsel for the defendant adopted this motion on behalf of the defendant. The trial court overruled the motion with respect to the breaking and entering charge.

* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.-2- Each defendant testified on his own behalf, but neither renewed the motion to strike at the conclusion of the case. However, counsel for the codefendant, arguing that the evidence did not show that the codefendant had any knowledge of the stolen check, moved "the Court to set aside its decision and consider the evidence as to [the codefendant]." Counsel for the defendant did not adopt this motion or make a separate motion to set aside the verdict. "[W]hen a defendant elects to present evidence on his behalf, he waives the right to stand on his motion to strike the evidence made at the conclusion of the Commonwealth's case." McQuinn v. Commonwealth , 20 Va. App. 753, 755, 460 S.E.2d 624, 625 (1995) (en banc) (quoting White v. Commonwealth , 3 Va. App. 231, 233, 348 S.E.2d 866, 867 (1986)). Here, the defendant took the stand on his own behalf. He did not move or renew the motion to strike the evidence at the conclusion of the case or argue that the evidence was insufficient as to the statutory burglary charge, see Lewis v. Commonwealth , 8 Va. App. 574, 383 S.E.2d 736 (1989), or join in or adopt the codefendant's motion to set aside the verdict. Accordingly, the defendant failed to preserve the sufficiency of the evidence question for appeal. Rule 5A:18 shall not bar consideration of an issue on appeal "for good cause shown or to enable [this Court] to attain the ends of justice." Rule 5A:18. In the present case, no good cause has been shown that prevented the defendant from moving to-3- strike the evidence at the conclusion of his case, or from moving to set aside the verdict. Moreover, we do not find it necessary to consider the issue in order to attain the ends of justice.

See McQuinn , 20 Va. App. at 755, 460 S.E.2d at 625. We affirm the defendant's conviction. Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             225
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    79491
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     284536
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                364252
<PP&E>                                         3285369
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2795953
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1032654
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1249499
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       9605
<COMMON>                                        168822
<OTHER-SE>                                   (2230373)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1032654
<SALES>                                        3439374
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3439374
<CGS>                                          3125163
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3125163
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                486929
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              162100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (172718)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (172718)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 611692
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    438974
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Toreador Resources Corporation;(2)
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;(3)
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operation and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;(4)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))for the registrant and have:
     (5)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
   Date: August 9, 2006/s/ G. Thomas Graves IIIG. Thomas Graves IIIPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
No. 53747.

protests 759334-G, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### D. N. Hatton & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

When the case was called for trial counsel for the plaintiffs offered in evidence the special report of the appraiser in protests 759334-G, 759335-G, and 845923-G, and a Government chemist’s report in protest 60688-K. On each of the reports the merchandise was described as “kelp meal.” It was held that the merchandise in question consists of kelp meal, a form of kelp, and following *Centennial Flouring Mills Co. et al.*v. *United States*(29 C. C. P. A. 264, C. A. D. 200), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1705 was sustained.

Cole, J., concurring.