alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.2




 Exhibit 10.2 

AMENDMENT TO 
 SUBSCRIPTION
AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of October 25, 2022 (the “Effective
Date”), by and between Cartesian Growth Corporation, an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands (the “Issuer”), and the Subscriber set forth on the signature pages to the Subscription Agreement
(as defined below) (the “Subscriber”). The above parties are referred to collectively herein as the “Parties,” and individually as a “Party.” 

RECITALS 

WHEREAS, the Parties have previously entered into that certain Subscription Agreement, dated September 19, 2022 and attached hereto as
Exhibit A (the “Subscription Agreement”), providing for the purchase by the Subscriber of a number of shares set forth on the signature page thereto (the “Base Share Number”); and 

WHEREAS, the Issuer desires to amend the Subscription Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth herein. 

AGREEMENT 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, terms and conditions contained herein and such other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Issuer hereby agrees as follows: 
 A. Defined Terms and Recitals. Except
as otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Business Combination Agreement, as amended, or the Subscription Agreement, as applicable. 

B. Amendments to Subscription Agreement. References to “Subscribed Shares” in the Subscription Agreement shall refer to the
sum of the Base Share Number plus a number of Shares equal to the product of (a) the number of Sponsor Redemption Shares (as defined in the Sponsor Support Agreement) forfeited pursuant to Section 3 of the Sponsor Support Agreement,
multiplied by (b) a fraction (i) the numerator of which is the Base Share Number and (ii) the denominator of which is the sum of the number of Non-Redeemed SPAC Class A Common Shares
and the number of Private Placement Shares. 
 C. No Further Modification. Except as set forth herein, the Subscription Agreement
remains unmodified and in full force and effect. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Subscription Agreement and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall control. 

D. Governing Law. This Amendment, and any claim or cause of action hereunder based upon, arising out of or related to this Amendment
(whether based on law, in equity, in contract, in tort or any other theory) or the negotiation, execution, performance or enforcement of this Amendment, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, without
giving effect to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. 
 [Signature Page Follows] 











 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Issuer has caused this Amendment to be executed as of the day and
year first written above. 
  

			
	ISSUER:
	
	CARTESIAN GROWTH CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Peter Yu

	Name: Peter Yu
	Title: Chief Executive Offcier













 EXHIBIT A 

Subscription Agreement 

(attached)
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00238

- CR

Roderick A. Williams

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§

§ From County Criminal Court No. 5

o f T arrant County (1260518 )

April 24, 2014

Opinion by Justice Dauphinot

Concurrence by Justice Walker

( nf p)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

__ /s/ Lee Ann Dauphinot

_____________ Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1964 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1964

 To amend title 49, United States Code, to exempt certain flights from 
               increased aviation security service fees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 27, 2014

  Ms. Hirono (for herself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Begich, and Mr. Schatz) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
           Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 49, United States Code, to exempt certain flights from 
               increased aviation security service fees.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Passenger Fee Restructuring 
Exemptions Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. EXCEPTIONS TO RESTRUCTURING OF PASSENGER FEE.

    (a) In General.--Section 44940(c) of title 49, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Fees imposed'' and inserting the 
        following:
            ``(1) In general.--Except as provided by paragraph (2), 
        fees imposed''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(2) Exceptions.--Fees imposed under subsection (a)(1) may 
        not exceed $2.50 per enplanement, and the total amount of such 
        fees may not exceed $5.00 per one-way trip, for passengers--
                    ``(A) boarding to an eligible place under 
                subchapter II of chapter 417 for which essential air 
                service compensation is paid under that subchapter; or
                    ``(B) on flights, including flight segments, 
                between 2 or more points in Hawaii or 2 or more points 
                in Alaska.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 601(d) of the Bipartisan Budget 
Act of 2013 is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by 
inserting ``, as modified by the amendments made by section 2 of the 
Passenger Fee Restructuring Exemptions Act of 2014'' after ``subsection 
(b)''.
                                 <all>
```
NOTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ MICHAEL STAPLETON ASSOCIATES, LTD., Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, AMERICAN K

- 9 DETECTION SERVICES, LLC, Defendants

- Appellees

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

GLOBAL K9 PROTECTION GROUP, LLC, Plaintiff

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

-------------------------------------------------- Case: 23-1145 Document: 19 Page: 1 Filed: 01/05/2023M ICHAEL S TAPLETON A SSOCIATES , L TD

. V

. US 2

AMERICAN K

- 9 DETECTION SERVICES, LLC, Plaintiff

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

______________________
2023

- 1145

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:22

- cv

- 00573

- RTH, 1:22

- cv

- 00620

- RTH, 1:22

- cv

00630

- RTH

, Judge Ryan T. Holte.

______________________ O R D E R The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

January 5 , 2023 Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: January 5, 2023 Case: 23-1145 Document: 19 Page: 2 Filed: 01/05/2023
# C_2012335EN.01000101.xml

| 1.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 335/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 335/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

31 October 2012

2012/C 335/01

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2993 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 103,78 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4598 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,80645 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,6000 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2076 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,3855 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,064 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 284,05 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6962 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1390 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5420 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3312 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2528 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3005 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0697 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5810 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5853 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 417,18 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,2692 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,1041 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5270 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 481,56 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9597 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 53,527 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,7049 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,876 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6389 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9685 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 69,9200 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2993

JPY

Japanese yen

103,78

DKK

Danish krone

7,4598

GBP

Pound sterling

0,80645

SEK

Swedish krona

8,6000

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2076

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,3855

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,064

HUF

Hungarian forint

284,05

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6962

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1390

RON

Romanian leu

4,5420

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3312

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2528

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3005

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0697

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5810

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5853

KRW

South Korean won

1 417,18

ZAR

South African rand

11,2692

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,1041

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5270

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 481,56

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9597

PHP

Philippine peso

53,527

RUB

Russian rouble

40,7049

THB

Thai baht

39,876

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6389

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9685

INR

Indian rupee

69,9200

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Table 4.  Estimates of the Total Housing Inventory for the
                United States:  First Quarter 2001 and 2000

(Estimates are in thousands and may not add to total, due to rounding)


                                    First     First    Standard
                                   quarter   quarter   error on  Standard     2001
Type                                2001       2000      2001    error on   Percent
                                   estimate  estimate  estimate difference  of total

All housing units.................  121,148   119,105       232        329       100

  Occupied........................  106,794   105,293       243        345        88
    Owner occupied................   72,131    70,701       244        345        60
    Renter occupied...............   34,663    34,592       197        278        29

  Vacant..........................   14,354    13,812       135        190        12
    Year-round vacant.............   10,813    10,306       119        166         9
      For rent....................    3,135     2,989        65         91         3
      For sale only...............    1,141     1,161        40         56         1
      Rented or sold,
      awaiting occupancy..........      794       748        33         46         1
      Held off market.............    5,743     5,408        88        123         5
        For occasional use........    1,853     1,858        50         71         2
        Temporarily occupied
        by persons with
        usual residence elsewhere.    1,163       985        40         54         1
        For other reasons.........    2,727     2,565        61         85         2

    Seasonal vacant...............    3,541     3,506        69         98         3
260 La. 129

#### Kenneth S. RHODUS et ux. v. CITY-PARISH GOVERNMENT OF the CITY OF BATON ROUGE and the Parish of East Baton Rouge, et al.

No. 51966.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 13, 1971.

In re: Kenneth Rhodus applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 253 So.2d 537.

Not considered. The application was not timely filed. See Article 7, Section 11, Louisiana Constitution.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JOHN WILLIAM SNYDER

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 1277

[ October 24, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County ; Charles A. Schwab

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562013CF002636A

.

John William Snyder, Bonifay, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, M AY and F OR ST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
261 La. 523

#### Abner E. HUGHES, Trustee, v. Gregory J. BURGUIERES.

No. 52353.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 13, 1972.

In re: Gregory J. M. Burguieres applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Mary. 258 So.2d 626.

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.
# C_2012242EN.01000502.xml

| 11.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6647 — Mitsubishi Corporation/Mitsubishi Electric Corporation/Mitsubishi Elevator (Singapore))

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 242/03

On 6 August 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6647. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6647. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
#### Larkin BROOM v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 47272.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 26, 1973.

Singley & Morgan, Henry E. Pope, Columbia, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Wayne Snuggs, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County; Francis T. Zachary, Special Judge.

Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and PATTERSON, INZER, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ.

Affirmed.
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [S-106-2018]

An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) by CODEZOL, C.D., grantee of FTZ 163, requesting subzone status for the facility of Liquilux Gas Corporation, located in Ponce, Puerto Rico. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on July 27, 2018.

The proposed subzone (1.96 acres) is located at Carr. Del Muelle #215 in Ponce, Puerto Rico. No authorization for production activity has been requested at this time. The proposed subzone would be subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 163.

In accordance with the Board's regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to review the application and make recommendations to the Executive Secretary.

                    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 10, 2018. Rebuttal comments                           ( print page 37463)                        in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to September 25, 2018.                

                    A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's website, which is accessible via                     *www.trade.gov/​ftz.*

                    For further information, contact Camille Evans at                     *Camille.Evans@trade.gov*                     or (202) 482-2350.                

Dated: July 27, 2018.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-16444 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

No. 22

- 40141 Summary Calendar

United States of America, Plaintiff

— Appellee ,

versus
Andres Garcia

- Gonzalez, Defendant

— Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:21

- CR

- 807

- 1

Before Smith, Dennis, and Southwick, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam : *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Andres Garcia

Gonzalez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Garcia

- Gonzalez has not filed a response. We have

* Pursuant to 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 9, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-40141 Document: 00516465534 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2022No. 22

- 40141

2 reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue fo r appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED

. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2

. Case: 22-40141 Document: 00516465534 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/09/2022
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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
December 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 10-K Report), that:

(1) the 10-K Report
fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) the
information contained in the 10-K Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

The undersigned have executed this Certification effective as April 11, 2007.



/s/ James R. RiedmanJames R. Riedman Chairman and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Kenneth E. WolfKenneth E. Wolf Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer


A signed original of this Certification has been provided to Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and will be
retained by Phoenix Footwear Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2012339EN.01001101.xml

| 7.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 339/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 339/11

---

Call for proposals under the 2013 Ideas work programme of the 7th EC Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities

2012/C 339/09

Notice is hereby given of the launch of a call for proposals under the 2013 Ideas work programme of the 7th Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (2007 to 2013).

Proposals are invited for the following call. The call deadline and budget are given in the call text, which is published on the Participant Portal website.

Ideas work programme

Ideas work programme

| Call Title | ERC Consolidator Grant |
| --- | --- |
| Call Identifier | ERC-2013-CoG |

Call Title

ERC Consolidator Grant

Call Identifier

ERC-2013-CoG

This call for proposals relates to the work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2012) 4562 of 9 July 2012.

This call for proposals relates to the work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2012) 4562 of 9 July 2012.

Information on the modalities of the call, the work programme, and the guidance for applicants on how to submit proposals is available through the relevant European Commission website:

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/ideas

---
#### In re ESTATE of Abraham BROWN, Deceased.

No. 72-677.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 31, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.