alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.8



 Exhibit 10.8 

ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT 
 OF THE
SUPPLY UMBRELLA AGREEMENT 
 This Assignment Agreement (the “Assignment Agreement”) is made effective as of September 3, 2007
by and between ORTHO-CLINICAL DIAGNOSTICS INC., a corporation of the State of New York, having a business office at 1001 U.S. Highway 202, Raritan, New Jersey, 08869 (hereinafter referred to as “OCD”), and THE COMMON SERVICES AGENCY
constituted pursuant to the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978 (as amended) and having its principal place of business at Gyle Square, 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9EB acting through its division the SCOTTISH NATIONAL BLOOD
TRANSFUSION SERVICE (hereinafter referred to as “SNBTS”). 
 RECITALS 

WHEREAS, on December 1, 2004, OCD and SNBTS entered into a Supply Umbrella Agreement (the “Umbrella Agreement”) regarding their
relationship concerning the manufacture, supply and sale of products contained within the Umbrella Agreement; and 
 WHEREAS, Alba
Bioscience (“Alba Bioscience”), a division of SNBTS, is a commercial business operating within the Scottish National Health Service and SNBTS intends to sell the business of Alba Bioscience to Dalglen (No. 1062) Limited, company number
SC310584 (intended to be re-named Alba Bioscience Limited) (the “Purchaser”); and 
 WHEREAS, Alba Bioscience has been
manufacturing and supplying the products to OCD under the Umbrella Agreement on behalf of SNBTS. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
foregoing premises and the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 

1. Assignment. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 22.5 of the Umbrella Agreement, both parties hereto consent to the assignment
of the Umbrella Agreement to the Purchaser of Alba Bioscience, and the Umbrella Agreement is hereby assigned to the Purchaser of Alba Bioscience with effect from the date of such purchase and OCD agrees that the Purchaser of Alba Bioscience shall
assume the benefit and the burden of the Umbrella Agreement with effect from the date of this Assignment Agreement. 
 2. Terms and
Conditions. Except as expressly amended herein, all terms and conditions of the Umbrella Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

3. Counterparts. This Assignment Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but
all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly
authorized respective representatives as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	ORTHO-CLINICAL DIAGNOSTICS, INC.:
		
	 By:
	 	/s/ Stuart Magloff
	Name: Stuart Magloff
	Title: Vice President, Worldwide Operations


SCOTTISH NATIONAL BLOOD TRANSFUSION SERVICE, 
 A DIVISION OF THE
COMMON SERVICES AGENCY 
  

			
	 By:
	 	/s/ Keith Thompson
	Name: Keith Thompson
	Title: National Director


DALGLEN (No.1062) LIMITED 
  

			
	 By:
	 	/s/ D.J.P.E. Cowan
	Name: D.J.P.E. Cowan
	Title: Director
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Indian Affairs

          - [189A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900253G]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Shawnee Tribe and the State of Oklahoma entered into a compact governing class III gaming; this notice announces the approval of the Tribal Gaming Compact between the Shawnee Tribe and the State of Oklahoma.

# DATES:

This compact takes effect on June 8, 2018.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary—Policy and Economic Development, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Under section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2701*et seq.,*                     the Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the                     **Federal Register**                     notice of approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. As required by IGRA and 25 CFR 293.4, all compacts are subject to review and approval by the Secretary. The Compact authorizes the Tribe to engage in certain class III gaming activities, provides for certain geographical exclusivity, limits the number of gaming machines at existing racetracks, and prohibits non-tribal operation of certain machines and covered games.                

Dated: May 7, 2018.

John Tahsuda,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Exercising the Authority of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2018-12343 Filed 6-7-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
No. 10973.

#### Pugh, Treasurer, *v.*Doelker.

Decided May 26, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

*Mr. George S. Marshall,*city solicitor,' and *Mr. John L. Davies,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Kinkead, Sheets & West,*for defendant in error.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error. Grounds stated in journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed, at the cost of the defendant in error.

And thereupon, this court proceeding to render judgment which the circuit court of said Franklin county should have rendered, it is ordered and adjudged that there is due plaintiff in error on said assessment, as in the petition set forth, and interest thereon, duly levied and assessed on said south one-half of Lots 25 and 26 in Samuel Parson’s Addition as the same is more particularly described in the petition herein, the sum of Eight Hundred and Eighty-Three and 52-100 Dollars ($883.52), with interest from May 26, 1908.

It is, therefore, considered, adjudged and decreed by the court that unless the said defendant in error pay or cause to be paid to said plaintiff in error the said sum aforesaid, within three days from the entry of this decree, that said real estate be sold for the payment of said assessment and interest thereon, as provided by law.

It is further considered and ordered that the *434plaintiff in error recover of the defendant in error his costs in this court, in the circuit court and in the court of common pleas expended, to be taxed.

The improvements involved and the assessments made to pay for the same, were had under the provisions of what is known in this case as the Taylor law, which for the purposes of this case must be considered valid, and that the lien of the assessments under said law continues until they are paid. The lien still existing tolls the appropriate remedy for its enforcement.

Price, C. J., Shauck, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 15**

 

 

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM

 

 

Board of Directors and Shareholders

Cubic Corporation

 

We have reviewed the condensed consolidatedbalance sheet of Cubic Corporation as of December 31, 2008, and therelated condensed consolidated statements of income and cash flows for thethree month periods ended December 31, 2008 and 2007.  These financial statements are theresponsibility of the Company’s management.

 

We conducted our reviews in accordance withstandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (UnitedStates).  A review of interim financialinformation consists principally of applying analytical procedures, and makinginquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters.  It is substantially less in scope than anaudit conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is theexpression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole.  Accordingly, we do not express such anopinion.

 

Based on our reviews, we are not aware of anymaterial modifications that should be made to the condensed consolidatedfinancial statements referred to above for them to be in conformity with U.S.generally accepted accounting principles.

 

We have previously audited, in accordancewith the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (UnitedStates), the consolidated balance sheet of Cubic Corporation as of September 30,2008 and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’equity and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein) and in ourreport dated December 2, 2008, we expressed an unqualified opinion onthose consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information setforth in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet at September 30,2008, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to theconsolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.

 

 
|                  | /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------|
|                  |                           |
|                  |                           |
| San Diego, California |                           |
| February 4, 2009 |                           |

 

----
No. 10513.

#### Worthington *v.*Blair.

Decided March 10, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Fayette county.

*Mr. John Logan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Mills Gardner,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Michael C. Howard and Virginia D. 

Hamilton, Appellants

No. 06-20-00085-CV v.

Matterhorn Energy, LLC, and Mike Cherry, 

Appellees

Appeal from the 71st District Court of 

Harrison County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 19-

0998). Opinion delivered by Justice 

Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of 

the court below. Therefore, we reverse the portion of the trial court’s judgment that failed to 

dismiss Lessees’ tortious interference with an existing contract, tortious interference with 

prospective business relations, and business disparagement claims based on communications 

made in Lessors’ petition and lis pendens. We affirm the denial of Lessors’ TCPA motion to 

dismiss Lessees’ breach of contract claim and the tortious interference with an existing contract, 

tortious interference with prospective business relations, and business disparagement claims 

based on communications directly made to third parties. We remand the case to the trial court 

for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

We further order that the appellants and appellees shall each pay one-half of all costs 

incurred by reason of this appeal.

RENDERED MAY 4, 2021

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM the
Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2000 and the Consolidated Statement
of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 2000 and is qualified in its
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000865084
<NAME> OXFORD HEALTH PLANS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         198,632
<SECURITIES>                                   868,380
<RECEIVABLES>                                   56,694
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,255,563
<PP&E>                                         110,133
<DEPRECIATION>                                  90,354
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,444,610
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          957,388
<BONDS>                                         28,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           983
<OTHER-SE>                                     458,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,444,610
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,111,802
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,116,544
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               476,422
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              34,332
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                484,504
<INCOME-TAX>                                   199,085
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            285,419
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (20,325)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   265,094
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.02


</TABLE>
ex10-8.htm












Exhibit 10.8







Current Director Fee Arrangements







Directors of Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. ("Bancorp") receive a monthly fee of $1,000, which is the only compensation paid to directors by Bancorp, except for stock options which may be granted in the discretion of the Board of Directors under Bancorp's 2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Directors of Great Southern Bank receive a monthly fee of $2,000. The directors of Bancorp and the directors of the Bank are the same individuals. The directors of Bancorp and its subsidiaries serving on the Audit Committee are paid a fee of $300 per meeting attended, except for the chairman of the Audit Committee, who is paid a fee of $350 per meeting attended.  Director Brown serves on the Bank’s Compliance Committee and is paid a fee of $300 per meeting attended.  The directors of Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not reimbursed for their costs incurred in attending Board and committee meetings.
copies ofstate Forms Ecology has not developed any new state forms pursuant to the proposed state corrective action program. RCRIS information will be submittedusing existing RCRIS forms provided by U.s. EPA.
ORIG~NAL
 

UNITED STATES OF AMRICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMSSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

)


il the Matter of
 ) 

)

POL YPORE INTERNATIONAL, INC., ) Docket No. 9327 

Respondent. ) 

) 

ORDER REQilRING EXPEDITED BRIEFING
 

The paries are hereby directed that any oppositions to motions or supplemental motions 

that may be fied by non-paries seeking in camera treatment of documents to be introduced at 

trial shall be due no later than three business days after the filing of such non-pary motion. 

ORDERED: J)lt rJ'"

D. Michael Chappell 

Administrative Law Judge 

Date: May 8, 2009
#### James Kenneth BOYDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-766.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 18, 1971.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; M. Daniel Futch, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 99-1



CERTIFICATION OF WILLIAM BELZBERG, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

WESTMINSTER CAPITAL, INC.



This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q/A (the Form 10-Q/A) for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 of Westminster Capital, Inc. (the Issuer).



I, William Belzberg, the Chief Executive Officer of Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) |  | the Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) |  | the information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
| | ---- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: February 6, 2003,



By

/s/  William BelzbergWilliam Belzberg, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer




35
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Veritas DGC Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended April 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I, Thierry Pilenko, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



June 11,
2004

| |  | /s/THIERRY PILENKOThierry Pilenko Chief Executive
Officer
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Veritas DGC Inc. and will be retained by Veritas DGC Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JULY 19, 2007

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 07-10745

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00125-CR-ORL-19-KRS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

ANTHONY LEE DAVIS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

 (July 19, 2007)

Before WILSON, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

John E. Fernandez, appointed counsel for Anthony Lee Davis, has filed a
2

motion to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent

review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals

no issues of arguable merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and

Fernandez’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
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 Fansteel Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the
“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), Gary L. Tessitore, as President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company and R. Michael McEntee, as Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to his 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 result of operations of the
      Company.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Fansteel Inc. and will be retained by
Fansteel Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
 
 
 Dated:
May 8, 2008
 
 
 /s/GaryL.TessitoreGary
      L. TessitorePresident
      and Chief Executive Officer/s/R.MichaelMcEnteeR.
      Michael McEnteeVice
      President and Chief Financial Officer
258 La. 209

#### Martha Blasco MALONE v. Bernard L. MALONE, Jr.

No. 51196.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 24, 1971.

In re: Martha Blasco Malone applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 243 So.2d 100.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.

Granted, limited to assignment of errors 2 and 3.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We hereby consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-112360) and Form S-8 (No. 333-39065, 333-92525, 333-112213, 333-130235, 333-50296, 333-71374, 333-122148, 333-122155, 333-138863, 333-03656, 333-147423, 333-155360 and333-162973) of Adept Technology, Inc. of our report dated September 6, 2011 relating to the consolidated financial statements and the financial statement schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ Armanino McKenna LLP 

ARMANINO McKENNA LLP

San Ramon, California 

September 6, 2011
#### Norman COHEN, Appellant, v. Saul J. MORGAN, Appellee.

No. 74-52.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 11, 1974.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Eugene Fischer, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The  undersigned,  Robert A. Bourne,  the  President and Treasurer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund IX, Ltd.  (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K for the  period  ending  December  31,  2002 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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 results of operations of the Partnership.

Date:    March 24, 2003                /s/ Robert A. Bourne
      ---------------------            ------------------------------
                                       Name:  Robert A. Bourne
                                       Title: President and Treasurer