alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.13



                           [MEDIS EL LTD. LETTERHEAD]



July 18, 1996



Mr. Yitzhak Cohen
Vice-President Finance
The University of Bar-Ilan
Ramat Gan 52100
By Registered Mail

Re:  Notification of election regarding royalties

We refer to your letter dated July 2, 1996 in which you notified us of your
desire to begin receiving royalties pursuant to paragraph 8.1 of the agreement,
dated October 17, 1991, as amended (the "License Agreement"), among you, Israel
Aircraft Industries Ltd., and Medis El Ltd. In accordance with paragraph 8.3 of
the License Agreement (paragraph 6 to the amendment to the agreement), Medis El
is entitled to elect the cancellation of paragraph 8.3 to the License Agreement.
The significance of this change is that Medis El will be obligated to pay a
higher royalty rate in lieu of the provisions of paragraph 8.3 as follows: In
paragraph 8.2 the rate of 5% will increase to 6.5% and the rate of 3% will
increase to 4.5%; in paragraph 8.4 the rates of 2% will increase to 3.5%.

Please be advised that Medis El Ltd. hereby notifies you of its desire to revoke
the provisions of paragraph 8.3 to the License Agreement. Please acknowledge
receipt of this notification by signing the copy of this letter and return it to
the sender in the envelope we are providing.

Sincerely


/s/ Israel Fisher
----------------------------------
Israel Fisher
Vice President Finance

Receipt of this notification is acknowledged.

University of Bar-Ilan


/s/
----------------------------------
Bar-Ilan University
```

[104th Congress Public Law 72]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ72.104]

[[Page 109 STAT. 776]]

Public Law 104-72
104th Congress

                                 An Act

 
    To extend au pair programs. <<NOTE: Dec. 23, 1995 -  [S. 1465]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AU PAIR PROGRAMS.

    (a) Repeal.--Section 8 of the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 
1990 (Public Law 101-454) <<NOTE: 104 Stat. 1065.>> is repealed.

    (b) Authority for Au Pair Programs.--The Director of the United 
States Information Agency is authorized to continue to administer an au 
pair program, operating on a world-wide basis, through fiscal year 1997.
    (c) Report.--Not later than October 1, 1996, the Director of the 
United States Information Agency shall submit a report regarding the 
continued extension of au pair programs to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on International Relations of 
the House of Representatives. This report shall specifically detail the 
compliance of all au pair organizations with regulations governing au 
pair programs as published on February 15, 1995.

    Approved December 23, 1995.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 1465:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 141 (1995):
            Dec. 13, considered and passed Senate.
            Dec. 18, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
STATE OF CONNECTICUT 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

Attachment D 

List of Regulatory Provisions Redacted From the NSR SIP Revision 

Section 22a-174-1, Definitions: 

(4) "Affected State or States" 

(18) "CAS Number" 

(20) "Combustion Efficiency" 

(29) "Dioxin emissions" 

(44) "Hazardous air pollutant" 

(45) "Hazard limiting value" 

(60) "Maximum allowable stack concentration" 

(107) "Stripping facility" 

(111) "Title V source" 

(112) "Throughput" 

(117) "Watercourse" 

Section 22a-174-2a, Procedural requirements for new source review and Title V 

permitting : 

(a) Signatory Responsibilities, the entire subsection ; 

(b) Public notice, subdivisions (1), (2), (3), (4), (5)(D), (5)(F) and (9); 

(c) Public Comments and Hearings, subdivisions (2), (5), (6)(B) and (6)(C) ; 

(d) New Source Review and Title V Non-Minor Permit Modification, subdivisions (4), 

(7) and (8); 

(e) New Source Review and Title V Minor Permit Modification, subdivisions (2), (3)(D) 

and (5); 

(f) Permit Revisions, subdivisions (2)(F), (5) and (6) 

( Printed on Recycled Paper ) 

79 Elm Street " Hartford, CT 06106 - 5127 

http ://dep .state .ct.us 

An Equal Opportunity Employer 
Attachment D 

Page 2 

(g) Permit Transfer, the entire subsection ; 

(h) Permit Revocation, the entire subsection; and 

(i) Permit Renewal, the entire subsection . 

Section 22a-174-3a, Permit to Construct and Operate Stationary Sources : 

(c) Applications : subparagraph (1)(H) ; 

(d) Standards for granting and renewing a permit : subparagraph (3)(J) and (M); 

(i) Ambient air quality analysis, Table 3a(i)-1 reference to `dioxin' emissions; and 

(m) Permit requirements for Hazardous Air Pollutants subject to the provisions of section 

112(g) of the Act, as may be amended from time to time: the entire subsection. 

Rev. June 7, 2002
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc., a
Nevada corporation, (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Alexis Korybut, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify the following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





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 results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ Alexis
Korybut


Alexis
Korybut


Chief
Executive Officer





May 24,
2010
No. 00-7094.

#### Paredes *v.*Johnson, Warden, et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 10.44


                                   AMENDMENT 6
                                   -----------
                                       TO
                                       --
                              CONSULTING AGREEMENT
                              --------------------

The following sets forth the terms of "Amendment 6" to the Consulting Agreement
between OSPREY PARTNERS (aka/ Michael A. Mulshine), 868 Riverview Drive,
Brielle, NJ 08730 ("Osprey") by SEDONA CORPORATION (the "Company").

It is hereby agreed pursuant to this Amendment 6 to the Consulting Agreement,
for the period from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003, that in
consideration of Osprey's continued services on the Company's behalf which will
include Mulshine's time and efforts relating to the work performed in regard to
his Corporate Secretary responsibilities, his investor relations activities, and
his general consulting support of the Company for 2003, Osprey's compensation
for services shall be as follows:

     a)  The Company shall pay Osprey a monthly consulting fee in the amount of
         $10,000, with $3,500 to be due and payable in cash on the 1st day of
         January 2003, and on the 1st day of each month thereafter, and $6,500
         to be paid in shares of the Company's Common Stock, on the 1st day of
         January 2003 and on the 1st day of each month thereafter, with the
         value of the shares to be computed by taking the 5-day average closing
         price of the stock on the last five (5) trading days of the prior
         month. These shares are to be issued free of restrictive legend
         pursuant to certain provisions of the SEDONA Corporation "2000
         Incentive Stock Option Plan" (the "Plan") and Section 6(f) of that Plan
         pertaining to "Bonus Stock and Awards in Lieu of Obligations".

     b)  Osprey hereby agrees that for each share of Common Stock issued on a
         monthly basis under this Agreement, Osprey will forfeit a share of
         Common Stock underlying the Warrants held by Osprey (See "Exhibit 1"
         attached), starting from the highest exercise price Warrants, and
         working down the list of Warrants, starting from WC0137A.

     c)  The Company agrees that all cash payments to Osprey to be made to the
         account designated by Osprey via Wire Transfer, which fees shall be
         paid by Osprey, on the date such funds are due and payable; and

     d)  This agreement is approved with the understanding that it is cancelable
         by either party upon 30 days written notice.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:

OSPREY PARTNERS                            SEDONA CORPORATION

By:      /s/ Michael A. Mulshine            By:      /s/ Marco Emrich
         -----------------------                     ----------------------
         Michael A. Mulshine                         Marco A. Emrich


Date:             02.04.03                  Date:             02.04.03
         -----------------------                     ----------------------
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Susan Lind HYERS a/k/a Susan Matney, Appellee.

No. M-80.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 9, 1970.

Rehearing Denied June 30, 1970.

*179Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Joseph A. St. Ana, Jacksonville, for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The State of Florida has appealed a final judgment dismissing the information filed against appellee herein and discharging her from custody because of the State’s failure or refusal to divulge the name of its confidential informant whose information was used in part as a basis for procuring a search warrant. The judgment is reversed upon the authority of the decision of this court in the companion case of State of Florida v. James Eugene Matney, Leo Schuty a/k/a Leo Dean Welsh, and Susan Lind Hyers a/k/a Susan F. Matney, Case No. M-82, opinion filed this date, 236 So. 2d 166.

JOHNSON, C. J. and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald GOINS.

No. 62098.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 12, 1978.

In re: Ronald Goins, applying for writ of certiorari, and review, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Parish of Lafayette.

Denied.
#### GREYHOUND LINES, INC., a California corporation, Petitioner, v. Melba I. CORY, as surviving widow of Fay C. Cory, Deceased, and Melba I. Cory, as Executrix of the Estate of Fay C. Cory, Deceased, Respondents.

No. 69-516.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 5, 1969.

Certiorari dismissed.
No. 00-905.

#### Albers et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RUBEN ISRAEL RIVERA, )

Petitioner ) Civil Action No. 06-142 Erie

) District Judge McLaughlin

v. ) Magistrate Judge Baxter

)

FRANKLIN J. TENNIS, et al., )

Respondents. )

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

AND NOW, this 10th day of July, 2006, after Petitioner presented a petition for a writ

of habeas corpus which he seeks leave to prosecute in forma pauperis, and it appearing that he

has an average monthly balance of $ 49.17 in his account at the State Correctional Institution at

Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, which sum far exceeds the $5.00 filing fee required to commence this

action, and it further appearing that requiring the Petitioner to pay the filing fee will not deprive

him of any necessities of life at the prison, 

It is recommended that leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied.

Petitioner shall have ten (10) days from the date of service in which to file written

objections to this Report and Recommendation. Failure to file timely objections may constitute a

waiver of any appellate rights.

 S/Susan Paradise Baxter 

 SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER

Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge

cc: Ruben Israel Rivera # EE-5391

 SCI Bellefonte

Box A

Bellefonte, PA 16823

Case 1:06-cv-00142-SJM-SPB Document 2 Filed 07/10/06 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BRIAN RAUPP, )

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Civil Action No. 06-223 ERIE

)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, )

Respondent )

)

ORDER

AND NOW this 13th day of November, 2006, after consideration of the Petitioner’s

Notice of Appeal of Magistrate’s Decision (Doc # 12)

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that said Notice of Appeal is DENIED 

 S/Sean J. McLaughlin 

Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cc: counsel/parties of record NK 

Case 1:06-cv-00223-SJM-SPB Document 13 Filed 11/13/06 Page 1 of 1
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 20, 2019

No. 04-19-00266-CR

Jose Luis GONZALES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR12836

Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea 

bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately 

reflects that the criminal case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 

Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides: “The appeal must be 

dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made 

part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this 

appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 

unless appellant causes an amended trial court certification to be filed within ten (10) days of the 

date of this order showing appellant has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; see 

also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 

(Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED 

pending our resolution of the certification issue.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of May, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 10.82.1
                                                                 ---------------

                        AMENDED MANAGEMENT RETENTION PLAN

Synbiotics Corporation is implementing a "management retention plan" designed to
encourage you to remain am employee of the Company between now and the potential
sale of the Animal Health Business. The Management Retention Plan consists of a
cash or stock bonus and special treatment of outstanding stock options and
restricted stock. This Management Retention Plan does not alter or affect
existing Synbiotics employee benefit plans, the Special Payment Plan or existing
employee agreements.

To qualify for the Management Retention Plan, you must be an active employee,
who is employed on the day of the sale of the Animal Health Business, provided
that you have not notified the Company of your intent to resign your employment
with Synbiotics. This Management Retention Plan does not apply to:

1)   Employees who voluntarily leave the Company prior to the sale of the Animal
     Health Business

2)   Employees whose employment is terminated prior to the sale of the Animal
     Health Business

3)   Employees of W3COMMERCE

4)   Active employees who are offered and accept continued employment with the
     Company following the sale of the Animal Health Business.

Cash Bonus

A cash bonus payment (or you can elect to receive the cash bonus in stock - see
below) will be made on the day following the sale of the Animal Health Business.
The bonus payment will depend on the ultimate sales price of the Animal Health
Business and will be paid as a percentage of annual base salary ("the
Percentage"). In no event will the Percentage payment be less than 37.5% of an
employee's annual base salary and there is no maximum percentage. The Percentage
will be calculated as 1.25 times the sales price of the Animal Health Business.

Examples:

     If the sales price of the Animal Health Business were $35 million, then 35
times 1.25 would yield a Percentage of 43.75%. You would receive a cash bonus of
43.75% of your annual salary.

<PAGE>

     If the sales price of the Animal Health Business were $60 million then 60
times 1.25 would yield a Percentage of 75%. You would receive a cash bonus of
75% of your annual salary.

Restricted Stock and Stock Options

All of your unvested restricted stock and stock options will become fully vested
on the day following the sale of the Animal Health Business and you will receive
two years following the sale of the Animal Health Business to exercise any
unexercised stock options.



/s/ Kenneth M. Cohen
----------------------------
Kenneth M. Cohen
President and CEO
Synbiotics Corporation



I have read the above Management Retention Plan.
Acknowledged and accepted:

/s/ Serge Leterme
-----------------------------
Serge Leterme

January 29, 2001
-----------------------------
Date
EXHIBIT 10.3  December 16th, 2009   Amendment to Share Exchange Agreement dated August 24, 2007   Whereas, IA Global, Inc. and Raymond Pedersen entered into a Share Exchange Agreement on August 24, 2007 related to his ownership in Slate Consulting Co Ltd.   Whereas, IA Global, Inc. acquired a 20.25% interest in Slate Consulting Co Ltd by acquiring 40,500 shares in exchange for 3,600,000 shares of IAO common stock.   Whereas, the parties desire to amend the Share Exchange Agreement as follows:   1.  Slate Consulting Co Ltd agrees to pay IA Global, Inc. 1 Million IAO shares and 5 million Yen . Slate Consulting Co Ltd will reacquire  40,500 shares of Slate Consulting owned by IA Global, Inc.  2.  Slate will pay IAO on the following schedule: 1 Million IAO shares: December 31st 2009. 500 000 Yen January 31st, 2010. 1.5 Million Japanese Yen April 30, 2010 and 3 Million Japanese Yen July 31st, 2010.  3.  Ray Pedersen and Slate Consulting Co Ltd. agree to not sell or transfer any IAO shares until August 1, 2010.  4.  The Amendment and the Share Exchange Agreement, Management Services Agreement, and Right of First Refusal Agreements dated August 24, 2007 are the only agreements between the parties.   Agreed,   IA Global


By: /s/ Brian Hoesktra
Name:  Brian Hoekstra
        Ray Pedersen


By: /s/ Ray Pedersen
Ray Pedersen
        Slate Consulting Co Ltd


By: /s/ Ray Pedersen
Ray Pedersen ,
Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48591-48592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24566]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Determination Not To Revoke Antidumping Duty Orders and Findings 
Nor To Terminate Suspended Investigations

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce

ACTION: Determination not to revoke antidumping duty orders and 
findings nor to terminate suspended investigations

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is notifying the public of its 
determination not to revoke the antidumping duty order listed below.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 16, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Panfeld or the analyst listed 
under Antidumping Proceeding at: Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 13, 1997, the Department of 
Commerce (Commerce) published a Determination Not to Revoke Antidumping 
Duty Orders and Findings Nor to Terminate Suspended Investigations (62 
FR 43316). In that notice, an interested party, Chemical Products 
Corporation, was inadvertently listed as an objector to the revocation 
of industrial belts and components and parts thereof, whether cured or 
uncured, except synchronous & v belts from Germany. This firm did not 
file such an objection. Chemical Products Corporation did however 
object to the revocation of precipitated barium carbonate from Germany. 
In addition, our August 13, 1997 notice inadvertently did not include 
the order on precipitated barium carbonate from Germany. This notice 
serves to correctly identify the sole objector for industrial belts and 
components and parts thereof, whether cured or uncured, except 
synchronous and v belts from Germany and to notify the public that we 
no longer intend to revoke the antidumping duty order on precipitated 
barium carbonate from Germany.

Antidumping Proceeding

A-428-802

Germany
Industrial Belts and Components and Parts Thereof, Whether Cured or 
Uncured, Except
Synchronous & V belts
Objection Date: June 30, 1997
Objector: Gates Rubber Company

[[Page 48592]]

Contact: Ron Trentham at (202) 482-4793

A-428-061

Germany
Precipitated Barium Carbonate
Objection Date: June 13, 1997
Objector: Chemical Products Corporation
Contact: Tom Futtner at (202) 482-3814

    Dated: September 5, 1997.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for         AD/CVD Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 97-24566 Filed 9-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. National forests in Alabama. Bankhead RD, Alabama**
 
2013 | 2016
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:B 22/2/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber:000911990
 
June 28, 2018
Status : 18 June 2010 

REACH Consortium for Bentonite acid-leached 

CLP Classification 

According to the information available through the REACH IT portal, you are a member of the SIEFs 

for Bentonite acid-leached (EC number: 274-324-8, CAS number: 70131-50-9) and/or Montmorillonite 

acid-activated (EC number: 291-621-8, CAS number: 90431-92-8). 

The REACH Consortium for Bentonite acid-leached would like to inform you of the outcome of the 

hazard assessment it has conducted on the substance Bentonite acid-leached. The classification has 

been made against the criteria of the Regulation (EC) 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and 

packaging of substances and mixtures. The joint registration dossier will contain the classification 

information in the IUCLID section 2 and the supporting documents will be summarised in the other 

relevant sections. 

For Bentonite acid-leached, the warranted classification is “no classification” as the hazard 

assessment so far demonstrates that it is a non-hazardous substance. Although the Consortium still 

waits for some testing results, the warranted “not classified” status is not expected to change. Should 

there be any modification in the classification, you will be immediately informed by email and on the 

IMA REACH Hub. 

Please note that SIEF members with REACH registration duties by 31 May 2013 and 31 May 2018 still 

have to notify the “not classified” status for their substance Bentonite acid-leached to the ECHA 

Classification & Labelling inventory by 3 January 2011 unless they submit their registration under 

REACH for calcium carbonate by 30 November 2010. For the SIEF members who will join the joint 

registration and register Bentonite acid-leached by 30 November 2010, the notification of classification 

is indeed already covered in the joint registration dossier.