alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.3  EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION  THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION (Extension) is made and entered into effective as of September 4, 2010 by and between IA Global, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company) and Brian Hoekstra (Executive).  WHEREAS, The Company entered into an employment agreement with Executive effective as of September 4, 2009 which agreement will expire on September 4, 2010 unless extended (Employment Agreement); and  WHEREAS, The Company desires to extend the Employment Agreement through December 4, 2010.  NOW, THEREFORE,  In consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements herein contained, intending to be legally bound, the parties agree that the Employment Agreement be and hereby is amended, effective September 4, 2010, so that:  A. Paragraph 2 Term reads as follows:  Term.  This Extension is for a three month period commencing on September 4, 2010 and terminating on December 4, 2010, or upon the date of termination of employment pursuant to Section 8 of the Employment Agreement; provided, however, that the Term may be extended as mutually agreed to by the parties.  B. Except as specifically amended herein, the existing Employment Agreement remains in full force and effect.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth below.   IA GLOBAL, INC.EXECUTIVE/s/ Greg LeClaire/s/ Brian HoekstraBy: Greg LeClaireBrian HoekstraIts: Chair, Compensation CommitteeDate: September 1, 2010Date: September 1, 2010  [BRIAN HOEKSTRA EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION]
#### R. C. LETZRING, Appellant, v. HUGHES SUPPLY, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 69-238.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 22, 1969.

David A. Davis, Bushnell, for appellant.

*406Benjamin T. Shuman, of Waterhouse & Shuman, Orlando, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The order denying the motion to dismiss for improper venue is affirmed. See Jones v. Christina, Fla.1966, 184 So.2d 181; Duggan v. Tomlinson, Fla.1965, 174 So.2d 393; Croker v. Powell, 1934, 115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146.

Affirmed.

CROSS, C. J., and McCAIN and OWEN, JJ-, concur.
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

Number Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Unit Accessed Applicant County

MI-01 Chapel Road Reconstruction

National Park Service - 

Pictured Rocks 

National Lakeshore

Alger County Road 

Commission Alger

MI-02 Au-Train Forest Lake Road (FSR 

2278) Reconstruction

U.S. Forest Service - 

Hiawatha National 

Forest

Alger County Road 

Commission Alger

MI-03 Federal Forest Highway 13 Resurfacing

U.S. Forest Service - 

Hiawatha National 

Forest

Alger County Road 

Commission Alger

MI-08 Monument Road Reconstruction

U.S. Forest Service - 

Huron-Manistee 

National Forest

Iosco County Road 

Commission Iosco

MI-13 Federal Forest Highway 13/ 

Sturgeon River Bridge

Roadway and Bridge 

Rehabilitation

U.S. Forest Service - 

Hiawatha National 

Forest

Delta County Road 

Commission Delta

MI-14 West Jefferson Greenways Trail Trail Construction

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service - Detroit River 

National Wildlife 

Refuge

City of Trenton Wayne

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Michigan Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its initial, multiyear 

Program of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Michigan FLAP are listed below in no particular order, and include:

Michigan Program of Projects for Fiscal Years 2013-2014
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

The next step in the process will be to develop project agreements between Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division and the State/Local Agency 

partners. The amount of funds allocated will depend on finalizing these agreements. Funding for these projects is not guaranteed. Funding beyond FY 

2014 is dependent on reauthorization of the Access Program by Congress. The Michigan PDC does not have a firm date for the next call for projects 

under the Access Program, but another call is anticipated within the next year. If you have any questions please contact David Payne, Access Program 

Manager, at 571-434-1543 or email at David.Payne@dot.gov.
#### STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. J. P. MORGAN, Jr., Respondent.

No. 40389.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 18, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 240 So.2d 535.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

FEDERAL CORPORATION, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DESIREE TRUHLAR, CARLOS

ALVAREZ, ROSENDO AGUILAR,

JENNIFER BUTLER, MARIA T. RUIZ,

AUDEN TERCERO, LUCIA

CERECERES, ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ,

PRISCILLA RODRIGUEZ and LIBERTY

MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE

CORPORATION,

Appellees. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 16

- 00095

- CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law #3

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2014DRCV1401)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that Appellee s

recover from Appellant and its sureties, if any, see T EX .R.A PP .P . 43.5, on the judgment and all

costs, for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERE D THIS 1 0 TH DAY OF A UGUST , 2021.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Chief Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., McClure, C.J. (Senior Judge), and Hughes, J.

McClure, C.J. (Senior Judge)(Sitting by Assignment)

Hughes, J. (Not Participating)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. JOHN KOEHNLEIN, JR., Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 279 WAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 7th day of October, 2014, the Petition for All owance of Appeal is DENIED
.
258 La. 349

#### Lloyd LANDRY v. BITUMINOUS CASUALTY CORPORATION et al.

No. 51277.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 14, 1971.

In re: Fluor Corporation and American Motorist Insurance Company applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Cal-casieu. 244 So.2d 105.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
Case 1:05-cv-00254-DWA-FXC   Document 9   Filed 09/22/05   Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27992]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-201-806]


Steel Wire Rope From Mexico: Extension of Time Limits for 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of extension of time limits for preliminary results of 
antidumping administrative review.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leah Schwartz or G. Leon McNeill, 
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 
482-3782 or (202) 482-4236, respectively.

The Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results

    The Department of Commerce has received a request to conduct an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Steel Wire Rope 
from Mexico. On May 21, 1997, the Department initiated this 
administrative review covering the period March 1, 1996 through 
February 28, 1997.
    Because of the complexity of certain issues in this case, it is not 
practicable to complete this review within the time limits mandated by 
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. See Memorandum from Joseph A. Spetrini 
to Robert S. LaRussa, Extension of Time Limit for the Administrative 
Review of Steel Wire Rope from Mexico, dated October 16, 1997. 
Therefore, in accordance with that section, the Department is extending 
the time limits for the preliminary results to March 1, 1998, and for 
the final results to 120 days after the publication of the preliminary 
results. These extensions of time limits are in accordance with section 
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    Dated: October 16, 1997.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD Enforcement III.
[FR Doc. 97-27992 Filed 10-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### Franklin D. LEWIS, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA COMMISSION ON ETHICS, Respondent.

No. KK-245.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Sept. 19, 1978.

J. Lofton Westmoreland and T. Sol Johnson of Johnson, Green & Westmoreland, Milton, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., William C. Sherrill, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

At oral argument the parties stipulated before the court that respondent would not proceed, insofar as petitioner is concerned, under Article II, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution, but would confine its purported authority to that derived from Chapter 112, Florida Statutes. Upon consideration of the petition and response, the briefs filed by the respective parties and oral argument before the court, and without addressing the merits of the controversy between the parties, we conclude that the discretionary *468writ of prohibition should not be granted. Accordingly, the petition for writ of prohibition is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BOYER, Acting C. J., and SMITH and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3624 

To restrict the availability of Federal funds to organizations associated with 

the abortion industry. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 18, 2024 

Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. MARSHALL, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, 

Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. BUDD, 

Mr. BRAUN, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. HAGERTY, Mr. JOHNSON, 

Mr. YOUNG, Mr. DAINES, Mr. THUNE, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. COTTON, Mr. 

RICKETTS, Mr. ROUNDS, and Mr. PAUL) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

A BILL 

To restrict the availability of Federal funds to organizations 

associated with the abortion industry. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Life in For5 eign Assistance Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3624 IS

1 SEC. 2. RESTRICTION ON AVAILABILITY OF FEDERAL 

2 FUNDS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi4 sion of law, Federal funds may not be made available for 

5 purposes outside of the United States (including its terri6 tories and possessions) to— 

7 (1) any foreign nonprofit organization, foreign 

8 nongovernmental organization, foreign multilateral 

9 organization, or foreign quasi-autonomous non10 governmental organization that— 

11 (A) performs or promotes abortions, in12 cluding providing referrals, counseling, lob13 bying, and training relating to abortions; 

14 (B) furnishes or develops any item in15 tended to procure abortions; or 

16 (C) provides financial support to— 

17 (i) any entity that conducts any of the 

18 activities described in subparagraph (A) or 

19 (B); or 

20 (ii) any entity described in paragraph 

21 (2); or 

22 (2) any domestic nonprofit organization or do23 mestic nongovernmental organization that— 

24 (A) performs abortions; 

25 (B) furnishes or develops any item in26 tended to procure abortions; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3624 IS

1 (C) within the scope of any program or ac2 tivity that receives Federal funds— 

3 (i) performs or promotes abortions, 

4 including providing referrals, counseling, 

5 lobbying, and training relating to abor6 tions; or 

7 (ii) fails to maintain a complete phys8 ical and financial separation from activities 

9 described in clause (i) and such failure in10 cludes co-locating such a program or activ11 ity at any site where activities described in 

12 clause (i) are conducted; or 

13 (D) provides financial support to— 

14 (i) any entity that conducts activities 

15 described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C); 

16 or 

17 (ii) any entity described in paragraph 

18 (1). 

19 (b) INCLUSIONS.—The prohibitions described in sub20 section (a) include the transfer of Federal funds and goods 

21 financed with such funds. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 10.30

May 8,
2001

Demetrios
Theodorakis

RE: HearMe Retention ProgramPERSONAL and CONFIDENTIAL

This letter includes all of the information in my memo of April 24, 2001 with one addition. We have added information granting you an extension to your
option exercise period.

You
are critical to the Company's success. If you agree to remain with the Company and continue to meet performance expectations for the next six months, the Company agrees to the
following:







This
plan is based on the premise that you stay with HearMe and perform at or above the expectation level for your position. If you terminate your employment with HearMe prior to the
earliest to occur of October 31, 2001, or the close of a sale of the company, you will forfeit any remainingguaranteed salary, retention bonus, severance
pay,andthe extension of your exercise period.

This
retention program does not change the at-will nature of your employment relationship with HearMe. However, even in the event of a change of ownership, HearMe will
honor the above-described terms.

Sincerely,

Rob
Csongor
CEO

---

QuickLinks
#### Carmel WUAGNEUX, Appellant, v. George WUAGNEUX, Appellee.

No. 75-2259.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 13, 1977.

Andrew M. Chansen, Fort Lauderdale, and Leonard Feiner of Goodman & Berzner, Margate, for appellant.

Robert J. O’Toole, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Wife seeks to modify and enforce by contempt the terms of a New York divorce judgment which has been established as a Florida judgment. The trial court denied both her petition for modification and her motion for contempt.

Based upon the record in this case, w» find no reversible error. The wife failed to show a substantial change of condition which would justify modification of the original judgment. Also, the wife failed to establish whether or not the unpaid $20,000 was lump sum alimony or a payment due to the wife as part of a property settlement agreement. Being unable to make this determination, the trial court correctly denied wife’s motion for contempt. *Burke v. Burke,*336 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).

Our holding in this case shall not prevent the wife in subsequent proceedings from either seeking modification or enforcement of the judgment as provided by law.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., and PARHAM, HARRY C., Associate Judge, concur.
#### The READING COMPANY, Appellant, v. BLACK POINT STEAMSHIP COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3205.

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Jan. 19, 1937.

Bailey Aldrich, of Boston, Mass. (James Garfield, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellant.

Frederick Fish, of Boston, Mass. (Putnam, Bell, Dutch & Santry, of Boston, Mass., on the brief) for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The decree of the District Court (14 F. Supp. 43) is affirmed on the opinion of the District Court, with costs to the appellee.
SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY CONVERSION

INJURY CODE CONVERSION DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Suspected Serious Injury 2009 - Present

NM Uniform Crash Report Instruction 

Manual 2009,

NM Uniform Crash Report 2011

A - Incapacitated - carried from 

scene A Injury Code codes found on Report Form pg3 (Code Sheet pg1).

PEDESTRIAN AND PEDALCYCLIST (NON-MOTORIZED) CONVERSION

PERSON TYPE CODE STATE DEFINITIONS / INSTRUCTIONS / NOTES SOURCE LOCATION

Pedestrian 2009 - Present

NM Uniform Crash Report 2011,

NM Uniform Crash Report Instruction 

Manual 2009

Pedestrian Pedestrian data 

fields present

PEDESTRIAN: is a person not in or upon a motor vehicle or other road vehicle. Includes: a 

person afoot, sitting, lying, or working upon a roadway; or a person in or operating a 

pedestrian conveyance. Excludes: a person boarding or alighting from another conveyance, 

except a pedestrian conveyance, and any person falling or jumping from a motor vehicle in 

transport

Crash Classifications (Collision involving a 

pedestrian)

definition found on Manual 

pg13,16

Pedalcyclist 2009 - Present

Pedalcyclist Pedalcyclist data 

fields present

A pedalcyclist is any person riding upon a pedalcycle or in a sidecar attached to the 

pedalcycle. 

INCLUDES: Any of the following devices in transport: Unicycle Bicycle Tricycle Trailers or 

sidecars attached to any of the above devices

EXCLUDES: Pedalcycle towed by a motor vehicle, including: Hitching Unoccupied Pedalcycle. 

Crash Classifications (Collision Involving 

Pedalcycle) definition found on Manual pg13

New Mexico
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1



                         CERTIFICATION OF ANNUAL REPORT


I, Robert W. Duggan, Chief Executive Officer of Computer Motion, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, to the best of my knowledge, that:

(1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d));
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: March 28, 2002                        COMPUTER MOTION, INC.


                                            By: /s/ Robert W. Duggan
                                            Robert W. Duggan
                                            Chairman of the Board of Directors
                                            and Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND
      ACTING PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of ICC Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic Report"),
      I, Richard K Lauer, President, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief
      Financial Officer of our Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





1.
      the
      Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of our
      Company.




Dated:
                February 8, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Richard
                K LauerRichard
                K LauerPresident,
                Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial
                Officer
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Net Perceptions, Inc.
(the Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Thomas M. Donnelly, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

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/ Thomas M. DonnellyName:    Thomas M. Donnelly
Title:   Chief Financial Officer
Date:    November 13, 2002

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55424]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28244]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,670]


Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Winslow Plant, Winslow, Maine; 
Including Leased Workers of Northeast Laboratories, Winslow, Maine; 
Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker 
Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on August 27, 1997, applicable 
to all workers of Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Winslow Plant located in 
Winslow, Maine. The notice was published in the Federal Register on 
September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51152).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New information provided 
by the company shows that some employees of Northeast Laboratories, 
Winslow, Maine were engaged in employment related to performing 
environmental testing for the production of bath tissue produced by the 
Winslow Plant of Kimberly-Clark Corporation located in Winslow, Maine. 
Worker separations occurred at Northeast Laboratories as a result of 
worker separations at Kimberly-Clark Corporation.
    Based on these findings, the Department is amending the 
certification to include workers of Northeast Laboratories, Winslow, 
Maine leased to Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Winslow, Maine.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Kimberly-Clark Corporation adversely affected by imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-33,670 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of the Winslow Plant of Kimberly-Clark Corporation, 
located in Winslow, Maine, and leased workers of Northeast 
Laboratories, Winslow, Maine engaged in employment related to 
environmental testing for the production of bath tissue produced at 
the Winslow Plant of Kimberly-Clark Corporation located in Winslow, 
Maine who became totally or partially separated from employment on 
or after June 23, 1996 are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of October, 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-28244 Filed 10-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M