alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT #1 TO THE EQUITY PURCHASE AGREEMENT
ENTERED INTO ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2017


 


THIS AMENDMENT #1 (the “Amendment”)
TO THE EQUITY PURCHASE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO ON September 11, 2017, is made effective as of January 24, 2018, by and between
Aim Exploration, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and L2 Capital, LLC, a Kansas limited liability
company (the “Holder”) (collectively the “Parties”).


 


BACKGROUND


 


A.     
The Company and Holder are the parties to that certain equity purchase agreement (the “EPA”)
originally entered into by the Company and Holder on September 11, 2017; and


 


		B.	The Parties desire to amend the EPA as set forth expressly below.



 


NOW
THEREFORE, in consideration of the execution and delivery of the Amendment and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:


 


1.                  
Section 2.1 of the EPA shall be replaced in its entirety with the following paragraph:


 


Section
2.1PUTS. Upon the terms and conditions set forth herein (including, without limitation, the provisions of Article VII),
the Company shall have the right, but not the obligation, to direct the Investor, by its delivery to the Investor of a Put Notice
from time to time, to purchase Put Shares (i) in a minimum amount not less than $25,000.00 and (ii) in a maximum amount of the
lesser of (a) 100% of the Average Daily Trading Volume and (b) $250,000.00.


 


2.       
This Amendment shall be deemed part of, but shall take precedence over and supersede any
provisions to the contrary contained in the EPA. Except as specifically modified hereby, all of the provisions of the EPA, which
are not in conflict with the terms of this Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect.


 


 


 


[Signature page
to follow]


 




    	 	1	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed
this Amendment as of the date first above written.


 


 


	
        Aim Exploration, Inc.

         

        /s/
        James Robert Todhunter

        By: Name: James Robert Todhunter

        Title: Chief Executive Officer
	
        L2 Capital, LLC

         

        /s/
        Adam Long

        By: Name: Adam Long

        Title: Managing Partner



 








    	 	2
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Sal Gilbertie, President and Principal Executive Officer of Teucrium Trading, LLC, the Sponsor of Teucrium Commodity Trust (the “Registrant”), hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Registrant’s Amendment No. 1 to the report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.





By:
/s/Sal GilbertieSal GilbertiePresident/Principal Executive OfficerTeucrium Trading, LLC, Sponsor of Teucrium Commodity Trust





Date:  April 28, 2011
11.1

Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 7 Pension Plan

Checklist Item #11

Does the application include the required illustration utilizing stochastic projections? (This 

illustration is not required if the plan is not required to appoint a retiree representative under § 

432(e)(9)(B)(v)(I) and stochastic projections were not used in making the required determination.) 

See section 4.02(2).

Document 11.1 discusses the Pension Plan’s use of stochastic projections.
11.2

4.02(2) Stochastic Projections 

Document 11.1

Pension Plan’s Use of

Stochastic Projections

The Pension Plan is not the type of plan described in § 432(e)(9)(B)(v)(I), so it is not 

required to use stochastic projections in its illustrations demonstrating that it will avoid insolvency.
#### MONTGOMERY WARD & CO. v. HAYES.

No. 39174.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 1970.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 20, 1970.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63205]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30968]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Application for a License To Export Special Nuclear Material

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b) ``Public notice of receipt of an 
application'', please take notice that the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission has received the following application for an export 
license. Copies of the application are on file in the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission's Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C.
    A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene may be 
filed within 30 days after publication of this notice in the Federal 
Register. Any request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene 
shall be served by the requester or petitioner upon the applicant, the 
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, D.C. 20555; the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555; and the Executive Secretary, U.S. 
Department of State, Washington, D.C. 20520.
    The information concerning the application follows.

                                         NRC Export License Application                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Name of applicant, date of             Description of material                                               
   application, date received,   ----------------------------------------       End use        Country of origin
         application No.             Material type      Total quantity                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transnuclear, Inc., October 27,   High-enriched       26.738 kg.........  Fabrication of      Canada.           
 1997, October 29, 1997,           Uranium (93.3%).                        target material                      
 XSNM03012.                                                                for production of                    
                                                                           medical isotopes.                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated this 12th day of November 1997 at Rockville, Maryland.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ronald D. Hauber,
Director, Division of Nonproliferation, Exports and Multilateral 
Relations, Office of International Programs.
[FR Doc. 97-30968 Filed 11-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000022698
<NAME>                        COMSAT
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00
<CASH>                                         6,584
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  162,266
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               363,652
<PP&E>                                         2,391,511
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,067,203
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,900,395
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          291,896
<BONDS>                                        466,630
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       346,914
<OTHER-SE>                                     276,033
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,900,395
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               275,100
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  123,837
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               104,700
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             19,838
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                27,451
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (10,254)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            17,197
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (28,861)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (3,946)
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (15,610)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.31)
        



</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.46


 


FOURTH AMENDMENT TO 


EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


THIS FOURTH AMENDENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT (this “Fourth Amendment”) is made effective as of the 1st day of January 2017, by and between
OLD LINE BANK, a Maryland-chartered commercial bank (the “Bank” or “Employer”) and Mark A. Semanie (the
“Employee”). This Fourth Amendment amends in certain respects that certain Executive Employment Agreement dated May
13, 2013, between the Bank and Employee, (the “Original Agreement”).


 





	Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the
meanings assigned to them in the Original Agreement.






	Amendments. The Original Agreement is hereby amended as follows:







	The following sentence is hereby added to the end of Section 2 of the original agreement:








“As of January 1, 2017, the Board extended the Term for one additional
year, such that, as of such date, the Term was to expire as of March 31, 2019.”


 



	Section 3(A) of the Original Agreement is hereby amended by deleting said section in its entirety and
replacing it with the following:








“The Employee’s salary under this Agreement shall be $315,000.00
per annum, payable on a bi-weekly basis.”





 


All of the provisions of the Original Agreement are incorporated herein by reference
and shall remain and continue in full force and effect as amended by this Fourth Amendment.


 





	Counterparts. The Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall
be considered an original for all purposes but all of which shall together constitute one and the same instrument.



 






     


    


    




 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this First Amendment, under
seal, as of February 23, 2017, effective as of January 1, 2017.


 




 





	WITNESS/ATTEST:	 	OLD LINE BANK
	 	 	 
	/s/ Cathy A. Coughlin	 	By: 	/s/ James W. Cornelsen 	 	(SEAL)	
	Cathy A. Coughlin,	 	Name: 	James W. Cornelsen
	Senior Vice President &	 	President and Chief Executive Officer
	Director of Human Resources	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	WITNESS:	 	 
	 	 	 
	/s/ Cathy A. Coughlin	 	/s/ Mark A. Semanie	 	(SEAL)	
	 	 	Mark A. Semanie
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 183 

To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a pilot program 

to promote and encourage collaboration between the Department of Veterans Affairs and nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher learning that provide administrative assistance to veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2021 

Mr. WITTMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out 

a pilot program to promote and encourage collaboration 

between the Department of Veterans Affairs and nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher learning 

that provide administrative assistance to veterans. 

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 ‘‘Veterans Collaboration 

5 Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 183 IH

1 SEC. 2. PILOT PROGRAM ON COLLABORATION WITH NON2 PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

4 shall carry out a two-year pilot program to promote and 

5 encourage collaboration between the Department of Vet6 erans Affairs and nonprofit organizations and institutions 

7 of higher learning. In carrying out the pilot program, the 

8 Secretary shall emphasize collaboration with— 

9 (1) veterans service organizations that provide 

10 personnel with appropriate credentials to assist vet11 erans in filing claims and appeals with the Depart12 ment for disability compensation; and 

13 (2) educational institutions that provide pro 

14 bono legal assistance to veterans. 

15 (b) METRICS.—The Secretary shall establish metrics 

16 to determine which organizations and institutions provide 

17 the best service to veterans and seek to encourage such 

18 organizations and institutions to participate in the pilot 

19 program. 

20 (c) LOCATION.—The Secretary shall carry out the 

21 pilot program in States with the highest veteran popu22 lations, as determined by the Secretary. 

23 (d) USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA.—In carrying out the 

24 pilot program, the Secretary shall use social media to pro25 mote the collaboration efforts carried out under the pilot 

26 program and to notify veterans of such collaborations. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 183 IH

1 Quarterly reports will be provided to members of the Vet2 erans’ Affairs Committee that document the reach of the 

3 social media efforts and the number of veterans who use 

4 the program. 

5 (e) REPORTS.—Not later than 30 days after the end 

6 of a fiscal quarter, the Secretary shall submit to the Com7 mittees on Veterans’ Affairs of the Senate and the House 

8 of Representatives a report on the pilot program, including 

9 the use of social media under subsection (d) and the num10 ber of veterans who receive administrative assistance from 

11 organizations and institutions through the program. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
NUMBER 13-99-00167-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

LOA’S TIRE AND AUTO SUPPLY, INC., Appellant,

v.

WENDOVER FUNDING, INC. AND

NATIONAL HERITAGE LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY IN LIQUIDATION, Appellees.

_____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

of Nueces County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

This appeal was abated by this Court on July 15, 1999, due to the bankruptcy of one

of the parties to this appeal. See 11 U.S.C. § 362; see generally TEX. R. APP. P. 8. Since

the abatement there has been no activity in this appeal. On April 16, 2009, the Court
2

ordered the parties to file an advisory regarding the status of the appeal and, if applicable,

a motion to reinstate the appeal or a motion to dismiss the appeal. The order notified the

parties that failure to respond to the order would result in reinstatement and dismissal of

the appeal for want of prosecution. 

The parties have failed to respond. Accordingly, we reinstate and dismiss the

appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 4th day of June, 2009.
# ECIP Participants_Sept. 2022
Exhibit 31.2.1 

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

CON EDISON OF NEW YORK—Principal Executive Officer 

 

I, Eugene R. McGrath, the principal executive officer of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 of Consolidated Edison Company ofNew York, Inc.; 

 

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 theperiod covered by this report; 

 

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

 

4. Theregistrant’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)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986.] 

 

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

 

5. Theregistrant’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 registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

 

(b) Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 5, 2004
#### Edgar Lewis BRAZEALE, alias Terry Cobb, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. Q-465.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 3, 1972.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and William C. Owen, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

*54Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and A. S. Johnston, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
#### Bobby Farris ROBERTS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-801.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 9, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Wayne Chalu, Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed. However, the judgment and sentence of the court, while indicating that appellant was to receive credit for all time served in jail, does not specifically set forth the period of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975). *Smith*v. *State,*310 So.2d 770 (Fla.2d DCA 1975). In addition, the language ordering appellant to be confined “at hard labor” is improper because no existing state statute provides for its imposition as a sentence for any offense. *Brooks v. State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977).

Remanded for correction of the sentence; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

GRIMES, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
#### Nancy Guedry BOURGEOIS v. Madge Fields DeSOTO et al.

No. 53813.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 7, 1973.

In re: Madge Fields DeSoto, wife of/and Anet DeSoto, and Charlotte S. Staack, Testamentary Executrix in the Succession of Jacob R. Bauer, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Tammany. 280 So.2d 271.

Application denied. The judgment is not final.
#### Oliver WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-483.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 6, 1974.

Rehearing Denied March 11, 1974.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Thomas A. Capelle and Ellen Condon, Asst. Public Defenders, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 88 S.Ct. 967, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247; Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S.Ct. 375, 34 L.Ed.2d 401; Rivers v. State, Fla. 1969, 226 So.2d 337; Zerega v. State, Fla.1972, 260 So.2d 1; State v. Galasso, Fla.1968, 217 So.2d 326; State v. Jones, Fla. 1967, 204 So.2d 515.

MANN, C. J., HOBSON, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

HENRY PRATT,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 198 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

HENRY PRATT,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 199 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of October, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.