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

House Calendar No. 216

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 523

[Report No. 103–709]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 4603) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies programs

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and making supplemental

appropriations for these departments and agencies for the fiscal year

ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 17, 1994

Mr. BEILENSON, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 4603) making appropriations

for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,

the Judiciary, and related agencies programs for the

fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and making supplemental appropriations for these departments and

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994,

and for other purposes.
2

HRES 523 RH

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 4603) making appropriations for

4 the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Ju5 diciary, and related agencies programs for the fiscal year

6 ending September 30, 1995, and making supplemental ap7 propriations for these departments and agencies for the

8 fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other pur9 poses. All points of order against the conference report

10 and against its consideration are waived. The conference

11 report shall be considered as read.

House Calendar No. 216

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 523

[Report No. 103–709]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference re1994, and for other purposes. agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, mental appropriations for these departments and ing September 30, 1995, and making supple- lated agencies programs for the fiscal year end- merce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and re- appropriations for the Departments of Com- port to accompany the bill (H.R. 4603) making

AUGUST 17, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
1 Brunner, Christine

From: Sargeant, Kathryn Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:36 PM To: Whiteman, Chad Subject: EPA Response to EO 12866 Comments on EPA Tier 3 dra ft final rule (2060-AQ86) Attachments: EPA Summary Response to EO12866_Comments on EPA_Tie r 3 draft final rule preamble - 2 _26_2014.docx; EO12866_Tier 3 2060-AQ 86 redlined preamble_02272014.docx

Attached is a summary response document to your com ments from 2/26.

I am also attaching a new preamble version that sho ws redline as compared to the 2/25 version (on whic h you commented).

There are a couple of typos fixed since the 2/25 ve rsion (that show up in redline), as well as one min or correction in section VI.A. that changes from this sentence: “We were conveying that obligated parties may use e ither monthly composites or batch testing.”

to this sentence:

“In this final rule, we are finalizing requirements for use of either monthly composites or batch test ing. “

Let me know if you have any questions.

From: Whiteman, Chad [ mailto:Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov ] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:01 PM To: Sargeant, Kathryn Subject: EO 12866 Comments on EPA Tier 3 draft final rule ( 2060-AQ86)

Kathryn, I’ve attached the latest round of EO 12866 comm ents on the EPA Tier 3 draft final rule. Comments can be identified by searching for “EO12866” found in comment bubbles . Let me know if you would like to discuss. Thanks, Chad
<PAGE>

                                              EXHIBIT 10.1

                 GREAT WESTERN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                             AMENDMENT
                               TO
                 NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
                        WITH JAMES F. MONTGOMERY
                         DATED FEBRUARY 26, 1991


      This Amendment between Great Western Financial Corporation, a Delaware
corporation (the "Corporation") and James F. Montgomery (the "Employee")
effectuates the changes to the subject option agreement (the "Option
Agreement") contemplated by the Amendment to Employment Agreement between the
Corporation and the Employee dated as of April 25, 1995 (the "Amendment"),
as approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the
Corporation.  Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined have
the meanings assigned to them in the Option Agreement or the Plan, as the
case may be.

This Amendment shall be effective as of 4:59 p.m. Pacific Standard
Time on December 28, 1995, but only if the Employment Agreement (as
defined in the Amendment) has not been terminated in accordance
with its terms by action of the Corporation before that time.

      FOR VALID CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
the parties amend the Option Agreement as follows:

      1.  EFFECT OF TERMINATION.  Section 6 of the Option Agreement is
amended to change the caption thereof and to add a sentence at the end
thereof, as follows:

     "6.  EFFECT OF TERMINATION OF SERVICES OR DEATH.    * * * * *
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Option and all other rights hereunder,
with respect to 23,500 shares, shall be extended and shall not terminate nor
become null and void until two (2) years after the later of a termination of
Employee's services as a member of the Board of Directors of the Corporation
or the termination of his services as a Consultant under his Consulting
Agreement dated as of April 25, 1995, except that in no event may the Option
be exercised by anyone under this Section or otherwise after the Expiration
Date."  

     2.   EXERCISABILITY OF OPTION.  Section 3 of the Option Agreement is
amended to add a new sentence after the second sentence to read in its
entirety as follows:

     "Notwithstanding the preceding vesting schedule, this Option
     shall become fully exercisable as of 4:59 P.M. Pacific Standard
     Time on December 28, 1995.

      3.  MISCELLANY.  Section 12 (subsidiaries) of the Option Agreement
is deleted.
<PAGE>
<PAGE>
               GREAT WESTERN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
               (a Delaware Corporation)


               By J. Lance Erikson                
                 ---------------------------------
               Its Executive Vice President


               EMPLOYEE


               James F. Montgomery
               -------------------


APPROVED:


By: /s/Charles D. Miller         
    ----------------------------
    Charles D. Miller
    Chairman, Compensation Committee
    of the Board of Directors
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31773-31774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14704]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-18-032]


Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Agency Holding the Meeting: United States International Trade 
Commission.

Time and Date: July 13, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

Place: Room 101, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

Status: Open to the public.

Matters to be Considered: 
1. Agendas for future meetings: None.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Vote on Inv. No. 731-TA-1380 (Final) (Tapered Roller Bearings from 
Korea). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its 
determination and views of the Commission by August 6, 2018.
5. Vote on Inv. No. 731-TA-1383 (Final) (Stainless Steel Flanges from 
China). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its 
determination and views of the Commission by July 25, 2018.
6. Outstanding action jackets: None.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.


[[Page 31774]]


    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: June 29, 2018.
William Bishop,
Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018-14704 Filed 7-5-18; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Phone conversation : June 26, 2013

Subject: Rule 431.1 Sewage Digester Gases

EPA Region 9: Stanley Tong 415

- 947

- 4122
AVAQMD: Chris Anderson 760

- 245

- 1661 x 1846

Stanley Tong: I was reviewing Rule 431.1 and noted that the sulfur limit for selling sewage digester gases increased from the SIP limit of 250 ppm to a 40 ppm monthly average and 500 ppm 15

- minute average. This can allow a limited i ncrease in sulfur emissions

.

Chris Anderson : We have two small POTWs and to the best of my knowledge, they do not sell their digester gases. They current ly burn the digester gas in boilers or flare it. The SIP limit for burning of

gases wa s 800 ppm.

Stanley Tong:

Thanks for the clarification. AVAQMD is in attainment for the 1971 SO 2 primary standard and based on CARB's review, California states there have been no violations of the SO 2 NAAQS

for the last two decades . CARB also states AVAQMD is below the 2010 SO 2 primary standard.
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 415

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 830) to amend title 5,

United States Code, to clarify procedures for judicial review of Federal

agency compliance with regulatory flexibility analysis requirements, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 3, 1994

Mr. EWING submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 830) to

amend title 5, United States Code, to clarify procedures

for judicial review of Federal agency compliance with

regulatory flexibility analysis requirements, and for other

purposes.

1 Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this

2 resolution the House shall resolve itself into the Commit3 tee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the

4 consideration of the bill (H.R. 830) to amend title 5,

5 United States Code, to clarify procedures for judicial re6 view of Federal agency compliance with regulatory flexibil7 ity analysis requirements, and for other purposes. The
2

HRES 415 IH

1 first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with, and all

2 points of order against the bill and against its consider3 ation are waived. After general debate which shall be con4 fined to the bill, and which shall not exceed 3 hours, 1

5 hour to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman

6 and ranking minority member of the Committee on the

7 Judiciary, 1 hour to be equally divided and controlled by

8 the chairman and ranking minority member of the Com9 mittee on Small Business, and 1 hour to be controlled by

10 Representative Ewing of Illinois, the bill shall be consid11 ered for amendment under the 5-minute rule, and each

12 section shall be considered as read. If on any day the Com13 mittee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come

14 to no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative

15 day the House shall, immediately after the approval of the

16 Journal, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for fur17 ther consideration of the bill.

18 At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for

19 amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill

20 to the House with such amendment as may have been

21 adopted. The previous question shall be considered as or22 dered on the bill and any amendment thereto final passage

23 without intervening motion except one motion to recom24 mit, with or without instructions.

Æ
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

July 25, 2011 

p0718 

Order 

 

July 25, 2011 

142891 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142891 

 COA: 299586 

Wayne CC: 09-006930-FH 

JERRY PRINGLE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 24, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 10761.

#### Washington *v.*The Pullman Company.

Decided February 23, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

*Mr. C. A. Thatcher,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Potter &*Potter, for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Summers, Davis and Si-iaucic, JJ., concur.
#### W. W. WARFIELD, Appellant, v. Arthur J. SPARKS, Appellee.

No. H-72.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Sept. 28, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 30, 1967.

*64Levin, Askew, Warfield, Levin & Graff, Pensacola, for appellant.

Paul Shimek, Jr., of Hahn & Reeves, Pensacola, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant in an action for wrongful conversion of funds has appealed from a final judgment entered by the Circuit Court for Escambia County, based upon a jury verdict.

The basic question presented for our determination in this appeal is whether there was sufficient evidence at the trial to support the verdict and judgment.

Since this is an action at law, in which action the issues of fact are to be determined by a jury, it is not the privilege of a trial or an appellate court to weigh and consider the evidence as though the judges had been empaneled as the members of the jury, and substitute our judgment on the factual issues for that of the actual jury. Our only function as to such issues is to decide whether there was sufficient competent, substantial evidence at the trial from which the jurors as reasonable men could have concluded as they did, even though we,, if we had been sitting in the jury box, might have reached a different conclusion.

No useful purpose would be served by here setting forth the details of the evidence at the trial. Suffice it to say that we have carefully considered that evidence and are of the opinion that, in keeping with the limited scope of our authority in this review as indicated above, and we find that there is. sufficient competent, substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict.

The appellant also claims that the trial court committed prejudicial error in refusing to give to the jury certain instructions which he had requested on the subject of his personal liability. With respect to this contention, we think the court’s jury instructions, viewed as a whole, fairly and adequately covered that subject, so that, even if such refusal were error, it did not constitute prejudicial or reversible error.

Therefore, the appellant having failed to carry his burden of demonstrating harmful error, the final judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
# Public Buildings Service

 

**Who We Serve**Other civilian federal agencies, who use our programs to provide their workspace and furnishings at best value to the American taxpayer.**What We Do**We acquire space through new construction and leasing and maintain federal properties nationwide. We own or lease an inventory of more than 8,800 assets, maintain more than 370 million square feet of workspace for 1.1 million federal employees, and preserve more than 500 historic properties.

Funded primarily through the Federal Buildings Fund through rent from federal agencies, the Public Buildings Service also:
                        - Promotes innovative workplace solutions .
                        - Acts as a green technologies proving ground .
                        - Supports development of urban communities .
                        - Provides space for child care centers .
                        - Donates or sells underutilized real estate for federal agencies .
                        - Commissions artwork for new federal buildings .
                        - Conserves federally-owned artworks, the largest public collection in the country.
                        - Supports sustainable design .
                        - Preserves historic buildings .

**Who to Contact**
                        - National Accounts Teams
                        - Regional Client Solutions

 

          Contact Us    

1-844-GSA-4111

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  Organization-  Overview 
-  Office of the Administrator overview 
-  Leadership Directory 
-  Federal Acquisition Service 
-  Public Buildings Service    -  Office of Portfolio Mgmt & Customer Engagement 
  -  Office of Project Delivery 
-  Office of the Chief Information Officer 
-  Office of Government-wide Policy 
-  Office of the General Counsel Overview 
-  Office of Strategic Communication 
-  Congressional & Intergovernmental Affairs 
-  GSA Office of Inspector General 
-  Office of Mission Assurance 
-  Office of the Chief Financial Officer 
-  Office of Administrative Services 
-  Office of Human Resources Management 
-  Office of Customer Experience 
-  Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
emma-ex1033_303.htm



 

Exhibit 10.33

확 약 서 (Letter of Commitment)

 

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. (이하 “엠마우스)는 나스닥(또는 NYSE American)에 상장을 진행 중에 있으며, 상장을 위한 순수자본요건을 충족하기 위하여 엠마우스가 보유한 주식회사 텔콘알에프제약(구 주식회사 텔콘, 이하 “텔콘”) 발행 주식을 처분하기를 희망하는 바, 아래의 사항을 당사자들은 각각 확약하기로 한다.

 

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. (“Emmaus”) is in the process of seeking to up-list its common stock on NASDAQ (or NYSE American) and wishes to liquidate the shares of Telcon RF Pharmaceutical Inc. (formerly Telcon Co., Ltd. and herein “Telcon”)  held by Emmaus in order to meet the listing requirements. The parties, therefore, hereby agree to each of the following:

 


	
1.
	
엠마우스는 2017. 6. 16.자 API Supply Agreement 제2조 제2항 제2호에 따라 엠마우스가 소유한 텔콘 발행 보통주식 6,643,559주에 대해 텔콘에게 담보(이하 “본건 질권”)로 제공한 바 있으며, 텔콘은 위 API Supply Agreement의 별첨(Exhibit A)에 규정된 Product 공급권 취득을 위하여 지급한 360억원과 동일한 금액의 총 매출이익이 텔콘에게 발생된 때 본건 질권을 해제하기로 합의한 바가 있다.




 

1. 6,643,559 shares of Telcon issued to Emmaus were pledged as collateral in accordance with Article 2, Paragraph 2.2 of the June 16, 2017 API Supply Agreement. It was previously agreed that the collateral shall be released when the total cumulative sales profit paid to Telcon reaches KRW 36 billion for the API supply stated in Exhibit A of the API Supply Agreement.

 


	
2.
	
상기 제1조와 관련하여, 본 확약서 날인과 동시에 엠마우스는 대량보유변동보고 지분신고를 약식서식으로 변경하여 지분신고를 하고, 텔콘은 본건 질권을 해당 주식에 대한 종목질권에서 해당 주식이 입고된 계좌에 대한 질권(이하 “계좌질권”)으로 변경하여 주식 매도가 가능하도록 한다. 단, 이와 같은 질권 변경은 기존 계약의 다른 조항을 변경하거나 그 밖에 어느 당사자의 의무를 경감시키는 효력을 갖지 아니한다. 




 

2. With respect to Paragraph 1 above, Emmaus will file the short form to report its shareholder ownership and become second largest shareholder of Telcon. Telcon shall change the pledge on Telcon shares owned by Emmaus to a pledge on the account (herein “account pledge”) in which the shares are held to enable the stock sale by Emmaus, immediately upon the execution of this commitment letter.  Provided, however, that such changes in pledge shall not have the effect of changing other provisions of existing contracts or reducing the obligations of any other party.

 

 

 



 

본 확약서는 2부로 작성되며, 본 확약서의 날인을 증명하기 위하여 각 당사자의 적법한 대리인이 서명날인한다(단, 한국 당사자의 경우 당사자들의 대표자들이 각 회사의 법인인감도장을 날인 또는 서명하고 인감증명을 첨부키로 한다).


This certificate shall be prepared in two copies, signed by a legitimate representative of each party.

 

 

2019년 12월 23 일

 

 

확약인

 

주식회사 텔콘알에프제약

주소 : 경기도 용인시 기흥구 동탄기흥로 684

대표이사 : 김 지 훈     (인)

 

Emmaus Life Sciences Inc. 

주소 : 21250 Hawthorne Blvd. Suite 800 Torrance, CA 90503

/s/ Dr. Yutaka Niihara

CEO : Dr. Yutaka Niihara              (인)
263 La. 93

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Charles HARRIS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 52798.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 17, 1972.

In re: Charles Harris applying- for remedial writ and writ of habeas corpus.

Writ denied. Based on evidentiary hearing held in the trial court, we find that the factual allegations concerning trial and pre-trial prejudice to be without merit. Further, the petitioner was represented by retained counsel at the times. See also State v. Harris, 260 La. 872, 257 So.2d 643 (1972).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0037 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DALE STEVEN MARTELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

**G RANT**  Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until October 14 , 202 1 , to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 7 2021

09/07/2021
Case Number: DA 20-0037
EXHIBIT 32


<PAGE>



     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of Whitemark  Homes,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  September 30, 2010 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  Barry  Reese,  the
Principal Executive and Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 results of the Company.


September 5, 2012                  By:  /s/ Barry Reese
                                        ---------------------------------
                                        Barry Reese, Principal Executive and
                                        Financial Officer


<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 462 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 462

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to 
 the funds needed to compensate for decreased revenues resulting from 
  the implementation of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on 
                           Tariffs and Trade.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 22, 1994

Mr. Bartlett of Maryland submitted the following resolution; which was 
           referred to the Committee on Government Operations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to 
 the funds needed to compensate for decreased revenues resulting from 
  the implementation of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on 
                           Tariffs and Trade.

    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
any funds that are necessary to compensate for decreased revenues 
resulting from the implementation of the Uruguay Round of the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade should be derived from reductions in 
spending and not from revenue increases.

                                 <all>
```
No. 11036.

#### Conrad *v.*The Keller Brick Co.

Decided January 19, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Summit county.

*Messrs. Smith & Myers*and *Mr. G. M. Anderson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. L. B. Bacon*and *Messrs., Musser, Kimber &**Huffman, for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed. Crew, C. J., Summers, Davis, Sriauck and Price, JJ., concur.