alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39128-39129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16941]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Importer of Controlled Substances Registration

ACTION: Notice of registration.

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

SUMMARY: Registrants listed below have applied for and been granted 
registration by-the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as importers 
of various classes of schedule I or II controlled substances.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The companies listed below applied to be 
registered as importers of various basic classes of controlled 
substances. Information on previously published notices is listed in 
the table below. No comments or objections were submitted and no 
requests for hearing were submitted for these notices.

[[Page 39129]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                                   FR docket                     Published
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restek Corporation..................................  83 FR 27634                     June 13, 2018.
Bellwyck Clinical Services..........................  83 FR 27633                     June 13, 2018.
Cambrex Charles City................................  83 FR 27633                     June 13, 2018.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

    The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has considered the 
factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the 
registration of the listed registrants to import the applicable basic 
classes of schedule I or II controlled substances is consistent with 
the public interest and with United States obligations under 
international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 
1971. The DEA investigated each company's maintenance of effective 
controls against diversion by inspecting and testing each company's 
physical security systems, verifying each company's compliance with 
state and local laws, and reviewing each company's background and 
history.
    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in 
accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as 
an importer for schedule I or II controlled substances to the above 
listed companies.

    Dated: July 31, 2018.
John J. Martin,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-16941 Filed 8-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### Stanley TURNER, D. C., Petitioner, v. FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, Respondent.

No. 77-1424.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 4, 1978.

Charles F. Broome, Titusville, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Charles S. Ruberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner’s license to practice chiropractic was revoked by the Florida State Board of Chiropractic Examiners despite findings of the Hearing Examiner that the petitioner was innocent of the particular charges contained in the complaint and a recommendation that the petitioner suffer only a public reprimand.

We find that the Board altered the Hearing Officer’s findings of fact without stating with particularity why certain findings were modified as required by Section 120.-57(l)(b)(9), *Florida Statutes*(1975). See *Moore v. Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board,*356 So.2d 19, 510 (Fla. 4th DCA, Case No. 77-2083, opinion filed February 21, 1978).

Accordingly the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is granted, the Final Order is quashed, and upon remand the Board should either adopt the Hearing Officer’s findings of fact or, if it wishes to alter these findings, it should, as required by Section 120.57(l)(b)(9), state with particularity why the findings are modified.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.46

                           [BANK MANDIRI LETTERHEAD]

****
****

ATTN:  **** / ****
       *
Tel:   1-407-806-5044


ACCOUNT NAME:      Neurotech Development Corporation
ACCOUNT * ****-****

DATED: 24 July 2000

DEAR SIRS,

     WE, PT. BANK MANDIRI (PERSERO), HEAD OFFICE, TREASURY DIVISION, JAKARTA,
INDONESIA, HEREBY CONFIRMS, INFORMS, VERIFIES AND AUTHENTICATES WITH FULL BANK
RESPONSIBILITY, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF MERGER, SET FORTH 1ST
AUGUST 1998, MERGING BANK EKSPOR IMPOR INDONESIA INTO BANK MANDIRI. THE BANK
GUARANTEES LISTED BELOW ISSUED BY BANK EKSPOR IMPOR INDONESIA (PERSERO).

     WE, BANK MANDIRI, FURTHER AFFIRM AND CONFIRM WITH FULL BANK RESPONSIBILITY
THE PAYMENT OF SAID BANK GUARANTEES UPON THE MATURITY DATE, 05 OCTOBER 2001,
BEARING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

CURRENCY.....................  UNITED STATES DOLLARS
NUMBER OF INSTRUMENTS........  FOUR (4) EACH
BANK GUARANTEE NUMBERS.......  **6/****-**/*/**
                               **7/****-**/*/**
                               **8/****-**/*/**
                               **9/****-**/*/**
TRADABLE AMOUNT..............  PER INSTRUMENT INDIVIDUALLY
TOTAL AMOUNT ISSUED..........  U.S.$ 100,000,000.00
                               (U.S. DOLLARS ONE HUNDRED MILLION)
AMOUNT EACH GUARANTEE........  U.S.$ 25,000,000.00
                               (U.S. DOLLARS TWENTY FIVE MILLION)
TYPE OF FORMAT...............  PRINTED INSTRUMENT
ISSUED AT....................  HEAD OFFICE, JAKARTA PLAZA, INDONESIA
ISSUED DATE..................  21 OCTOBER 1998
MATURITY DATE................  21 OCTOBER 2001
FORM OF SECURITY.............  REGISTERED FORM
FORMAT OF SECURITY............ INTERNATIONAL DEBT
<PAGE>


THE ORIGINALS OF BOTH THE ABOVE LISTED BANK GUARANTEES AND THE AMENDMENT,
CONFIRMATION AND AUTHENTICATION LETTER FOR SAID INSTRUMENTS ARE ENCLOSED IN THE
BONDED COURIER PACKAGE NUMBER 168-068448-2 FOR DELIVERY TO THE ABOVE LISTED
SECURITIES FIRM AND FOR FURTHER CREDIT TO SAID ACCOUNTS. WE FURTHER CONFIRM THAT
SAID BANK GUARANTEES ARE FREE AND CLEAR OF ANY LIENS, UNENCUMBERED, THEY ARE
AUTHENTIC AND VALID OPERATIVE INSTRUMENTS UNDER THE INSTRUCTIONS OF *******, AS
THE CORPORATE SECRETARY OF *****. THE LAWFUL BENEFICIARY AND REGISTERED
OWNER OF SAID BANK GUARANTEES AND AS INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS WITH
FULL RIGHTS OF OWNERSHIP.


PT. BANK MANDIRI (PERSERO),
HEAD OFFICE, TREASURY DIVISION, JAKARTA, INDONESIA


/s/  *****
-------------------------
PT BANK MANDIRI (PERSERO)
       KANTOR FUSAT
  *****
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2006-7281

MAURICE U. PLANTE, Claimant-Appellant,

v.

R. JAMES NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

Maurice U. Plante , of Warwick, Rhode Island, pro se.

Allison Kidd-Miller , Trial Attorney, Commercial Liti gation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for respondent-appellee. With her on the brief were Peter D. Keisler , Assistant Attorney General, David M. Cohen , Director, and Kathryn A. Bleecker , Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were David J. Barrans , Deputy Assistant General C ounsel, and Michael G. Daugherty , Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Of counsel was Michael T. Osborne , Attorney, United States Departm ent of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Appealed from: United States Cour t of Appeals for Veterans Claims Judge Alan G. Lance, Sr.NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.


## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2006-7281

MAURICE U. PLANTE, Claimant-Appellant,

v. R. JAMES NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

__________ ________________ DECI DED: February 8, 2007

__________________________

Before NEWMAN, MAYER and PROST, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM. Maurice U. Plante appeals the decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, which affirmed the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ de nial of service connection for

his headache disorder. Plante v. Nicholson , No. 04-0735 (Vet. App. Jan. 27, 2006). Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss his appeal. We may only review a Veterans Court decisi on to the extent that it pertains to the validity of “a rule of law or of any statute or regulation ... or any interpretation thereof(other than a determination as to a factual m a tter),” 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a), or “to interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, to the extent presented and neces sary to a decision,” Id. § 7292(c). Unless an appeal from the Veterans Court presents a
constitutional issue, we do not ot herwise have jurisdiction to review either “a challenge to a factual determination” or “a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of particular case.” Id. § 7292(d)(2). Plante offers many reasons why he believes the Veter a ns Court’s decis ion was

erroneous. After careful cons ider ation of his arguments, includ ing our own independent

review of the decis ion on behalf of this pro se appellant, we ar e unable t o find any issues or errors pertaining to either the v a lidity or the interp re tation of a rule of la w, statute, or regulatio n. Moreover, notwithstanding his numerous assertions of constitutional violations, none of Plante’s arguments actually rais e an iss u e pertaining to the United States Constitution. At most, they pertain to factual conclusions and the application of the law to those factual conc lusions, neither of which is sufficient to establish jurisdiction here.

2006-7281 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         3,566,000
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,820,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (459,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,118,000
<PP&E>                                         286,746,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,091,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 292,700,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9,980,000
<BONDS>                                        107,994,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    2,000
<COMMON>                                       10,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     174,714,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   292,700,000
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               23,933,000
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               11,987,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4,168,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                7,778,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,778,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                234,000
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   7,544,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.76
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit
10.3


 


FIRST
AMENDMENT TO


EXECUTIVE
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


THIS
FIRST AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is effective as of November 1, 2022, by and between
PetVivo Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Randall Meyer (the “Executive”
and together with the Company, each a “Party,” and collectively the “Parties.”)


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS,
the Parties entered into that certain Executive Employment Agreement dated as of November 10, 2021 (as the same now exists or may hereafter
be amended, modified, supplemented, renewed, restated, or replaced, the “Employment Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS,
pursuant to Section 3.1 of the Employment Agreement, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company conducted its
annual performance and compensation review of the Executive and approved an increase to Executive’s Base Salary.


 


WHEREAS,
the Parties desire to modify the Employment Agreement to reflect the salary increase as set forth herein.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:


 


AGREEMENT


 


1. Definitions.
Capitalized terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such term as set forth in the Employment
Agreement, and all references to Sections, shall mean the Sections of the Employment Agreement unless reference is made to another
document.


 


2. Amendment
to Employment Agreement. Section 3.1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended such that the Executive’s Base Salary
is increased from $220,000 to $270,000.


 


3. Full
Force and Effect. Except as specifically amended, modified, or supplemented by this Amendment, the Employment Agreement, as
amended, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


4. Governing
Law. The Parties expressly agree that (a) this Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the
State of Minnesota, without giving effect to any conflict-of-law principles and (b) Section 8.2 of the Employment Agreement shall
apply to any dispute hereunder.


 


5. Counterparts.
This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any
electronic signature) or other commonly recognized transmission method and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been
duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.


 


[Signature
Page Follows]


 




    	 



     


    

 


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


 


	 	EXECUTIVE:
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Randall Meyer
	 	 	Randall Meyer
	 	 
	 	PETVIVO HOLDINGS, INC.
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Robert J. Folkes
	 	 	Robert J. Folkes,
	 	 	Chief Financial Officer
# Patent

## Title
Alkoxysilane coating for cathode ray tubes

## Abstract

While the present invention has been illustrated and described in connection with the preferred embodiments, it is not to be limited to the particular structure shown, because many variations thereof will be evident to one skilled in the art and are intended to be encompassed in the present invention as set forth in the following claims:

## Background
## Claims

1. An in-process CRT front panel assembly comprising: incorporated into a CRT envelope, the body having: glass panel, and, retaining a shadow mask thereon.

2. The assembly of claim 1 wherein the body has a cross section which is substantially "U"-shaped, the bight of said "U"-shape being the first surface.

3. The assembly of claim 1 wherein the body has a cross section which is substantially "L"-shaped with one leg of said "L"-shape abutting the edge plane surface of the panel.

4. The assembly of claim 1 wherein the body is composed of a plurality of co-planar circumferential sections interconnected to form a frame.
Exhibit 12

                         Continental Global Group, Inc.
                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                        (In thousands, except for ratios)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  Years ended December 31
                                               2006         2005        2004         2003            2002
                                           -----------------------------------------------------------------------

<S>                                          <C>          <C>         <C>        <C>               <C>
Computation of Earnings:
Income (loss) before income taxes and
   accounting change                          $ 36,267     $ 30,061    $  7,127   $ (12,629)        $ (8,689)
Add:
   Interest expense (1)                          4,820        4,809       6,909      15,280           15,408
   Portion of rent expense
     representative of an interest
     factor                                      1,029          994         921         845              677
                                           -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings                                      $ 42,116     $ 35,864    $ 14,957   $   3,496         $  7,396
                                           =======================================================================

Computation of Fixed Charges:
   Interest expense                            $ 4,820      $ 4,809     $ 6,909    $ 15,280         $ 15,408
   Portion of rent expense
     representative of an interest
     factor                                      1,029          994         921         845              677
                                           -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges                                  $ 5,849      $ 5,803     $ 7,830    $ 16,125         $ 16,085
                                           =======================================================================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                7.20         6.18        1.91           -  (2)           - (3)
                                           =======================================================================
</TABLE>

(1)      Amortization of deferred financing costs of $520 is included in
         interest expense.

(2)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2003 by $12,629.

(3)      Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended
         December 31, 2002 by $8,689.
No. 11043.

#### The State, ex rel. Lanius, *v.*The Board of Trustees of the Sinking Fund of the City of Galion.

Decided October 12, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Crawford county.

*Mr. W. J.*Schwenck, for plaintiff in error.

*Mr.. L. Barker,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Sitauck and Price, JJ., concur. Spear and Davis, JJ., dissent.
7.1

i '

r,4

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

ZANE AARON TENOLD,

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN JIM SALMONSEN,

Respondent.

OP 21-0048 C 7 fry" 71

1 60111,

JUL 2 0 2021

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of Supreme Court

State of Montana

ORDER

Zane Aaron Tenold represents himself and has filed a petition for rehearing,

pursuant to M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i) and (iii), of this Court's April 27, 2021 Order denying

his petition for habeas corpus relief because the Department of Corrections (DOC) had

since correctly calculated his sentence allowing for an additional credit of 73 days toward

his first sentence.

Tenold now argues that he is due additional credit—time while on probation—

toward his sentence. Tenold points to a 2010 Judgment from the Ravalli County District

Court and this language: "The Defendant shall receive credit for time served on probation

from September 5, 2017, to January 30, 2010, the date of arrest for his violation." He states

that this credit should also be applied and that his sentence calculations are incorrect for

his other two sentences.

This Court did not overlook a material fact, and the April 27, 2021 Order does not

conflict with Montana law. Any credit for time on probation or street time applies only

once to a sentence. Section 46-18-203(7)(b), MCA (2005). That credit cannot be carried

forward to apply to other sentences imposed upon revocation. Here, Tenold violated his

probationary term in 2010. The District Court revoked Tenold's 2007 deferred imposition

of sentence for two, 2006 offenses and imposed two, concurrent ten-year commitments to

the DOC with all tirne suspended. The District Court ensured that Tenold would receive

07/21/2021

Case Number: OP 21-0048
credit from September 5, 2007 through January 30, 2010, because of his good behavior

while on probation prior to his violation. (Emphasis added.) The DOC Montana State

Prison Records Department would have applied that probationary credit to Tenold's

sentence in 2010 when it calculated his sentence upon revocation. The Records

Department calculates sentences based upon what is in the written judgment. We point out

that the District Court revoked Tenold's sentence again in 2016 because of several

violations, and the court made no mention of any credit for street time or probationary tirne.

Tenold cannot receive a double credit for street time when the credit was originally applied

to his 2010 sentence upon revocation. Tenold points to no authority for such argument.

His other arguments are without merit because as stated before, his fourth sentence

runs consecutively to his prior sentences. Tenold is not entitled to rehearing. M. R. App. P.

20(1)(d). Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Tcnold's Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and

DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to

Zane Aaron Tenold personally.

DATED this 2-6--day of July, 2021.

Chief Justice

g#i ..1.11„,

7
UNITED AIRLINES, INC.

233 SOUTH WACKER DRIVE

HDQIZ-10TH FLOOR

CHICAGO, IL 60606

DAN WEISS

MANAGING DIRECTOR—-INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS & REGULATORY 

PHONE: (872) 825-6828

FAX: (872) 825-0066

DAN.WEISS@UNITED.COM

August 29, 2013

Mr. Paul L. Gretch

Director

Office of International Aviation

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Joint Application of United and Air China

For An Amended Statement of Authorization

And Amended Exemption Authority

Docket DOT-OST-2003-16213

Dear Mr. Gretch:

United has completed its poll of carrier representatives in the attached service list. No carrier

objects to the approval of United and Air China’s August 27th application. United asks the 

Department to promptly approve this application so that United and Air China can secure foreign 

authority, make final operating plans and begin marketing the proposed code-share services.

Respectfully submitted,

Dan Weiss

Managing Director, International Affairs & Regulatory 

UNITED AIRLINES, INC. 

cc: George N. Tompkins, Jr.
 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the foregoing document on all 

persons named below by causing a copy to be sent via email.

msinick@ssd.com (Alaska)

francis.heil@aa.com

robert.wirick@aa.com

rsilverberg@sgbdc.com (ABX/Air Transport Intl.)

jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com (Amerijet)

jcanny@amerijet.com

rpommer@atlasair.com

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

charters@evergreenairlines.com (Evergreen)

cefelts@fedex.com

gbleopard@fedex.com

nssparks@fedex.com

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com (Frontier)

patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com

jhill@dowlohnes.com (Hawaiian/JetBlue)

matwood@cozen.com (Kalitta)

kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com

bob.kneisley@wnco.com

leslie.abbott@wnco.com

dkirstein@yklaw.com (Spirit)

jyoung@yklaw.com (Spirit)

thomas.ting@suncountry.com

anita.mosner@hklaw.com (UPS)

jennifer.nowak@hklaw.com

howard.kass@usairways.com

jegillick@zsrlaw.com (Virgin America)

john.varley@virginamerica.com

mlbenge@zsrlaw.com (World)

william.stallings@usdoj.gov

dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil

john.allen@faa.gov

Annalei Avanceña 

International Regulatory Advisor

United Airlines, Inc.

August 29, 2013