alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Execution
        Page for Escrow Agreement]

       

      IN
        WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Escrow Agreement
        to be executed in their respective names, all as of the date first above
        written.

       

      
        	 	
                COMPANY:

                SINO-GLOBAL
                  SHIPPING AMERICA, LTD.

              
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By:
                /s/ Cao
                Lei                                                         
                
	 	Name:
                Cao Lei
	 	Title:   
                CEO
	 	 
	 	 
	 	
                ESCROW
                  AGENT:

                SUNTRUST
                  BANK, N. A.

              
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By:  
                /s/ Matt
                Ward                                                 
	 	Name:
                Matt Ward
	 	Title: 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	BUYER:
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/
                Mark A.
                Harris                                                   
                
	 	MARK
                A. HARRIS, as joint tenant with
	 	ROSLYN
                O. HARRIS
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/
                Roslyn O.
                Harris                                                
                
	 	ROSLYN
                O. HARRIS, as joint tenant with 
	 	MARK
                A. HARRIS


      

       

       

      
        
          
          

        

        
          7
# C_2013026EN.01005001.xml

| 26.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/50

---

Order of the General Court of 21 November 2012 — Grupo T Diffusión v OHIM — ABR Producción Contemporánea (Lampe)

(Case T-343/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for a declaration of invalidity - Withdrawal of that application - No need to adjudicate)

2013/C 26/101

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Grupo T Diffusión, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: A. Lasala Grimalt, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: ABR Producción Contemporánea, SL (Barcelona, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 June 2012 (Case R 1622/2010-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between ABR Producción Contemporánea, SL and Grupo T Diffusión, SA.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Each party shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.

1

---
201/201a

7

dioxin/fur

PM

6

Source:

14.01b/hr

1,817 rolling 12 mnt

0.40 ngldscm

0.237

4751b/hr

North Silos Baghouse

Stack Tests .. Selected Companies

4/1411998 9.07 Ibs/hr

4/14/1998 329.8 Ib/hr

11/11/2005 03.83179E-02 ,

10/16/2002 0.237 ngldscm

5/23/2006 116 Ib/hr 5123/2008

AIRS No.:

5

2

3520001

NOW CEM

Comments:

AO DAQE:

OPNo.:

Five north silos which include rail unloading. 120

AMTS 39-9 4000 acfm

AO Date:

OP Date:

Location: Salt Lake

Size: B

NSPS Subpart:

8/8/1996

Method

201 (a)

201 (a)

Source:

Limitation

0.69lbs/hr

0.016 gr/dscf

Primary Crusher

Last Test Result Test Due

AIRS No.:

Period

2100017

Comments

Test A. D.

Test A. D.

Comments: LIMIT FOUND IN 40 CFR 60, 000. Location: Morgan

Size: A

NSPS Subpart: 000

AO DAQE:

OPNo.:

Method

2900001001

Limitation

AO Date:

OP Date:

Last Test

7/19/2004

Result Test Due Period Comments

201 (a) 0.022 gr/dscf 5/12/2004 0.0014 gr/dscf 5112/2009 3

Source:

Comments:

AO DAQE:

OPNo.:

South Bins Baghouse

Two South Bins which include rail unloading. 4000

acfm

AO Date:

OP Date:

AIRS No.: 3520001

Location: Salt Lake

Size: B

NSPS Subpart:

8/8/1996

Method

201 (a)

201 (a)

Source:

Limitation

0.69lbs/hr

0.016 gr/dscf

Transfer Baghouse

Last Test Result Test Due

AIRS No.:

Period

2900001

Comments

Test A. D.

TestA. D.

Comments: LIMIT FOUND IN 40 CFR 60, 000 Location: Morgan

Size: A

NSPS Subpart: 000

AODAQE:

OPNo.:

Method

02900001001

Limitation

AO Date:

OP Date:

Last Test

11/7/2005

Result Test Due Period Comments

201 (a) 0.022 gr/dscf 5/1212004 0.0006 gr/dscf 511212009 5

Tuesday, August 07,200710:00:35 AM Page 2 of 2
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Bruce Humphrey, Chief Executive Officer of Desert Sun Mining Corp.. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1. This Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2. The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: June 30, 2005





/s/_Bruce Humphrey

Bruce Humphrey

Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of IWT Tesoro Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30 , 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Forrest P. Jordan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  August 13, 2004 | /s/Forrest P. Jordan    |   |
|------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                         | Forrest P. Jordan       |
|                         | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
# C_2013071EN.01002201.xml

| 9.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/22

---

Order of the General Court of 15 January 2013 — Alfacam and Others v Parliament

(Case T-21/12) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Public service contracts - Procurement procedure - Supply of audiovisual services to the Parliament - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Articles 94 and 103 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) no 1605/2002 - Action manifestly devoid of any basis in law)

2013/C 71/34

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Alfacam (Lint, Belgium); Via Storia (Schiltigheim, France); DB Video Productions (Aartselaar, Belgium); IEC (Rennes, France) and European Broadcast Partners (Eubropa) (Aartselaar) (represented by: B. Pierart, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by: P. López-Carceller and C. Braunstein, and subsequently by: P. López-Carceller and G. Hellinckx, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Parliament’s decision of 18 November 2011 to award lot No 1 in the call for tenders EP/DGCOMM/AV/11/11 relating to the provision of audiovisual services within the Parliament in Brussels (Belgium) to watch tv and of the Parliament’s decision of 18 November 2011 rejecting Eubropa’s bid for that lot.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | The applicants shall bear their own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicants shall bear their own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.

1

---
# C_2014159EN.01002202.xml

| 26.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 159/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 159/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 April 2014 — Debonair Trading Internacional v OHIM — Ibercosmetica (SÔ:UNIC)

(Case T-356/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark SÔ:UNIC - Earlier Community and national word marks SO...?, SO...? ONE, SO...? CHIC and non-registered word marks - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Family of marks - Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rule 15(2)(b)(iii) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Admissibility of the opposition))

2014/C 159/30

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Debonair Trading Internacional Lda (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: T. Alkin, Barrister)

Applicant:

a

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Ibercosmetica SA de CV (Mexico City, Mexico)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 June 2012 (Case R 1033/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Debonair Trading Internacional Lda and Ibercosmetica, SA de CV

a

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 June 2012 (Case R 1033/2011-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal rejected as inadmissible the opposition based on Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark with regard to the signs relied on by Debonair Trading Internacional Lda so far as the United Kingdom and Ireland are concerned; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 June 2012 (Case R 1033/2011-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal rejected as inadmissible the opposition based on Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark with regard to the signs relied on by Debonair Trading Internacional Lda so far as the United Kingdom and Ireland are concerned;

a

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 311, 13.10.2012.

1

---
No. 74-5855.

#### Wright *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas would grant certiorari.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 4.9

           SECOND AMENDMENT TO SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENTS AND WARRANTS

This agreement is made this 29th day of February, 2000, by and between
Chequemate International, Inc. dba C-3D Digital, Inc., a Utah corporation and
Augustine Fund, L.P., an Illinois limited partnership (the "Subscriber").

I.   WHEREAS, the parties to this agreement have entered into subscription
     agreements for 8% convertible redeemable debentures on December 21, 1998,
     February 9, 1999 and June 4, 1999 ("the "Subscription Agreements"),
     pursuant to which thirteen (13) debentures (the "Debentures")  have been
     issued;

II.  WHEREAS, pursuant to the Subscription Agreements and an amendment thereto
     dated December 1, 1999, C-3D has granted common stock purchase warrants to
     the Subscriber (the "Warrants") on December 21, 1999, February 9, 1999,
     June 4, 1999 and December 1, 1999; and

III. WHEREAS, C-3D and the Subscriber desire to modify its December 1, 1999
     amendment agreement.

NOW, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1.   The defined terms of the referenced Subscription Agreements, Debentures and
     Warrants shall have the same meaning in this Amended Agreement.

2.   The parties agree to cancel paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the December 1,
     1999 amendment agreement.  This contemplates (a) the cancellation of the
     warrant for 100,000 pre-split shares of stock of C-3D granted pursuant to
     the December 1, 1999 amendment agreement, (b) the reinstatement of the
     previous exercised prices for the December 21, 1999, February 1, 1999 and
     June 4, 1999 warrants (on a post-split basis $14.56, $14.16 and $14.16
     respectively) and (c) the cancellation of any waiver of the Registration
     Payment provided for in the Debentures.

Augustine Fund, L.P.                         C-3D Digital, Inc.
By Augustine Capital Management, L.L.C.


By /s/ John Porter                      By /s/ J. Michael Heil
   ---------------------------             ---------------------------
   Its: President                          J. Michael Heil, CEO


                                       II-7
Before the United States Department of Transportation

October 19, 2011

Essential Air Service at

JONESBORO, ARKANSAS

Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq.

Docket OST-1997-2935

Withdrawal of Proposals by SeaPort Airlines, Inc. to 

Provide Essential Air Service at Jonesboro, Arkansas

SeaPort Airlines respectfully withdraws its proposal to provide essential air service at 

Jonesboro, Arkansas that was submitted to the above referenced Docket on July 21, 2011.

Correspondence regarding this matter should be directed to:

Timothy Sieber

Vice President – Strategy & Corporate Development

SeaPort Airlines, Inc.

7505 NE Airport Way

Portland, OR 97218

(971) 340-1716

tsieber@seaportair.com
R307. Environmental Quality,Air Quality. R307-351. Graphic Arts. R307-351-4. Standards for Rotogravure, Flexographic, and SpecialtyPrinting Operations. (I) No owner or operator of a packaging and publication rotogravure; packaging and publication flexographic, and specialty printing operations employing voe-containing ink may operate, cause, or allow or permit the operationofa facility unless: (a) The volatile fraction ofink, as it is applied to the substrate, contains 25.0%by volume orless ofVOe and 75.0% byvolume ormore ofwater; or (b) The ink as it is applied to the substrate, less water, contains 60.0%by volume ormorenonvolatile material; or (c) The owner or operator installs and operates either

a carbon adsorption system as described in R307-351-4(1XaXi)

oran incineration system as described in R307-351-4(l)(aXii). (i) A carbon adsorption system shall reduce the volatile organic emissions from the capture system by a minimum of90.0%byweight. (ii) An incineration system shall oxidize, from the capture system, a minimum of90.00/o ofthenon-methane voes measured as total combustible carbon to carbon dioxide and
water. (iii) A capture system as described in R307-351- 4(l)(c)(iv) shall beused in conjunction with a carbon adsorption system and an incineration system. (iv) The design and operation of a capture system
must be consistent with good engineering practices and shall be required to provide for an overall reduction in voe emissions ofat least:(A) 75.0% where a publication rotogravure process is employed; (B) 65.0% where a packaging rotogravure process is employed; or (C) 60.0% where a flexographic printing process is employed.(2) The owner or operator of an emission control device shall provide documentation thatthe system will attain therequirements ofR307-351-4. (3) The Emission control system shall be operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer recommendations. (4) The owner or operator ofan emission control device shall maintain for a minimum oftwo years records of operating and maintenance sufficient to demonstrate that the equipment is being operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturerrecommendations.

KEY: air pollution, graphic 

### arts,VOC, printingoperations Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: February 1,2013 Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 19-2- 104(1)(a)

!--dar--
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

**CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to theincorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-109183, 333-110678, 333-113192, 333-117441, 333-117443, 333-125901 and 333-130091 on Form S-3 and Registration Statements Nos. 333-119690, 333-109917, 333-99645, 333-74124,333-55364, 333-34202 and 333-42952 on Form S-8 of (1) our report dated September 26, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Avanex Corporation and subsidiaries (which report expresses anunqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment); and (2) our report dated September 26, 2006, relating to internal controlover financial reporting (which expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because of material weaknesses) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of AvanexCorporation for the year ended June 30, 2006. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

San Jose, California 

March 30, 2007
### A synthesis of aquatic science for management of Lakes Mead and Mohave

By: Michael R. Rosen**Kent TurnerSteven L. GoodbredJennell M. Miller

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1381

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report** 
- Chapters:
                                        Chapter                                            1                                                                                                : 
                                                                                            Introduction and summary of findings                                                                                        

- Images:                               - **Image**
  - **Image**
  - **Image** 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
**Exhibit 10.32**

**Amendment Number 2**

**to the Answerthink, Inc.**

**Employee Stock Purchase Plan**

**(asamended on February 16, 2001)**

Pursuant to the authority granted pursuant to Section 24 of the Answerthink, Inc. EmployeeStock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”), the Committee hereby amends Section 8 of the Plan to read in its entirety as follows: 

8. RIGHTS TOPURCHASE COMMON STOCK; PURCHASE PRICE. 

Rights to purchase shares of Common Stock will be deemed granted to participating employees as ofthe first trading day of each Offering Period. The purchase price of each share of Common Stock (the “Purchase Price”) shall be determined by the Committee; provided, however, that the Purchase Price shall not be lessthan 95% of the fair market value of the Common Stock on the last trading day of such Offering Period; provided, further, that in no event shall the Purchase Price be less than the par value of the Common Stock. For purposes of thePlan, “fair market value” means the value of each share of Common Stock subject to the Plan on a given date determined as follows: if on such date the shares of Common Stock are listed on an established national or regional stock exchange,are admitted to quotation on The Nasdaq Stock Market, or are publicly traded on an established securities market, the fair market value of the shares of Common Stock shall be the closing price of the shares of Common Stock on such exchange or insuch market (the highest such closing price if there is more than one such exchange or market) on such date or, if such date is not a trading day, on the trading day immediately preceding such date (or if there is no such reported closing price, thefair market value shall be the mean between the highest bid and lowest asked prices or between the high and low sale prices on such trading day) or, if no sale of the shares of Common Stock is reported for such trading day, on the next preceding dayon which any sale shall have been reported. If the shares of Common Stock are not listed on such an exchange, quoted on such System or traded on such a market, fair market value shall be determined by the Board in good faith. 

**Effective Date of Amendment: December 15, 2005**
```

[House Report 115-1085]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

115th Congress    }                                    {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                    {      115-1085

======================================================================

 
   WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON 
 RULES, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES

                                _______
                                

 December 19, 2018.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

              Mr. Sessions, from the Committee on Rules, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                      [To accompany H. Res. 1181]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 1181, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a 
two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is 
reported from the Rules Committee) against any resolution 
reported from the Rules Committee through the legislative day 
of December 24, 2018.
    Section 2 of the resolution provides that it shall be in 
order at any time through the calendar day of December 23, 
2018, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House 
suspend the rules and that the Speaker or his designee shall 
consult with the Minority Leader or her designee on the 
designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this 
section.

                                  [all]
```