alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Chapter 2.4.4. – Infection with Marteilia refringens

Annex 14. Item 6.5.2. – Article 9.6.3. of Chapter 9.6. ‘Infection with infectious myonecrosis virus’

CHAPTER 9.6.

INFECTION WITH INFECTIOUS MYONECROSIS VIRUS

[...]

Article 9.6.3.

Measures for the importation or transit of aquatic animal products for any purpose regardless of the infection with IMNV status of the exporting country, zone or compartment

The *aquatic animal products* listed below have been assessed as meeting the criteria for safety of *aquatic animal products* in accordance with Article 5.4.1. When authorising the importation or transit of these *aquatic animal products*, *Competent Authorities* should not require any *sanitary measures* related to IMNV, regardless of the infection with IMNV status of the *exporting country*, *zone* or *compartment*:

1)	*aquatic animal products* that have been subjected to a heat treatment sufficient to attain a core temperature of at least ~~60~~75°C for at least ~~60~~five minutes, or a time/temperature equivalent that inactivates IMNV;

2)	crustacean *meal* that has been subjected to a heat treatment sufficient to attain a core temperature of at least ~~60~~75°C for at least ~~60~~five minutes, or a time/temperature equivalent that inactivates IMNV;

3)	crustacean oil;

4)	chemically extracted chitin.

[...]

____________

WOAH *Aquatic Manual* 2025	8
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 499 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 499

 Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to allow Delegates 
  and the Resident Commissioner to file, sign, and call up discharge 
                               petitions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 27, 2015

Mr. Pierluisi (for himself, Ms. Norton, and Ms. Bordallo) submitted the 
   following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to allow Delegates 
  and the Resident Commissioner to file, sign, and call up discharge 
                               petitions.

    Resolved, That clause 2 of rule XV of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended as follows:
            (1) In paragraph (b), after ``Member'' each place it 
        appears insert ``, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner''.
            (2) In paragraph (c), after ``Member'' insert ``, Delegate, 
        or Resident Commissioner'' and after ``Members'' each place it 
        appears insert ``, Delegates, or Resident Commissioner''.
            (3) In the fifth sentence of paragraph (c), after ``a 
        majority of the total membership of the House'', insert ``, 
        plus all Delegates and the Resident Commissioner,''.
            (4) In paragraph (d)(1), after ``Member'' insert ``, 
        Delegate, or Resident Commissioner''.
            (5) In paragraph (e)(2), after ``Member'' insert ``, 
        Delegate, or Resident Commissioner''.
                                 <all>
```
63 P.3d 433

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

#### Mizukami v. Mizukami

24327, 24442

02/18/2003

Denied
30 Utah 2d 429

#### F. R. BAYLE, Jr., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Edzel Lane DROEGEMEIER, Defendant and Respondent.

No. 13364.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Feb. 21, 1974.

Wallace R. Lauchnor, Bayle & Lauch-nor, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and appellant.

Edward B. Gesas, Salt Lake City, for defendant and respondent.

HENRIOD, Justice:

Appeal from a no cause of action judgment by the court, sitting without a jury in an auto collision case. Affirmed, with costs to defendant.

Each party here urges that the other was the sole proximate cause of the damage done to the respective autos, — plaintiff’s being estimated by himself, — no one else, —at about $500, and defendant’s being estimated by himself, — no one else, — at $75 to $100, — all of which might be indicative that this case may be one born of vitriolic and mutual disaffection among the litigants. This possible conjecture seems to be born out by the facts that two competent lawyers ordinarily would charge fees far in excess of the aggregate damages alleged, for trying this case, preparing briefs, appealing to this court, then insisting on orally arguing it, with but one point involved, — that of sufficiency of the evidence. This theory, that belligerence begets battery is reflected in the record where the litigants here joined with an investigating officer to form a tripartite assemblage where, at the scene of the tragedy, harsh words were not scarce, few or far between.

The facts were highly controversial, and each party to this appeal cites facts favorable to himself, which aborts the rule that they should be recited in an atmosphere favorable to their arbiter, if reasonably believable. We resolve the controversion in favor of Judge Hanson, named in the syllabus above, than whom there is no better arbiter, and whose knowledge about con-troversion, finds itself without peer.

All that happened in this case is that plaintiff, in a sports car, came down a steep hill and bumped into defendant’s truck. There was a sharp difference of opinion as to the speed of the plaintiff’s car and as to whether defendant’s truck was moving or stalled as he was attempting to enter the driveway of his home. The trial court found everyone in this case to have been negligent, — except the police*241man, — and we think that the record, reflecting properly admitted facts, if believable by that mysterious “reasonable prudent man,” requires us to affirm ttie trial court, —and to suggest that if the damages claimed here are indicative of possible damage, safety and economy, the wise one would buy a truck instead of a sports car.

CALLISTER, C. J., and CROCKETT and TUCKETT, JJ., concur.

ELLETT, J., concurs in the result.
hlf-ex1053_61.htm





Herbalife International of America, Inc.

800 West Olympic Blvd., Suite 406

Los Angeles, California 90015

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phone  310 410 9600

	
Fax  213 765 9802
	




 

 

 

Exhibit 10.53

Mr. Michael O. Johnson

Executive Chairman 

Herbalife International of America, Inc.

800 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 406

Los Angeles, CA  90015

 

 

May 29, 2018

 

 

Re: Letter Agreement Amendment

Dear Michael,

Reference is hereby made to that certain letter agreement, dated as of November 1, 2016 (the “Letter Agreement”), by and between you and Herbalife International of America, Inc. (the “Company”).  Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Letter Agreement. The purpose of this letter is to memorialize the changes in your Base Salary and future long-term incentive grants under Items 2 and 4(a), respectively, of the Letter Agreement.

Subject to your acceptance of the terms set forth in this letter (by signing the enclosed copy of this letter), effective as of June 1, 2018:


	
 
	
1.
	
Base Salary.  Item 2 of your Letter Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:




“2.  Base Salary. The Base Salary shall be $11,538.46 per bi-weekly pay period ($300,000.00 on an annualized basis), paid in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll practices less applicable taxes and withholdings.”


	
 
	
2.
	
Long-Term Incentives:  Item 4(a) of your Letter Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:





	
 
	
“a.
	
Future Grants. So long as you are a member of the Board of Directors of the Parent, you shall receive long-term incentive grants in the same size, form and timing as, and under the same terms of, the grants made to non-management members of the Board of Directors of the Parent as approved by the Board of Directors of the Parent or the Compensation Committee thereof.”






This letter may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original instrument and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 

Except as expressly set forth herein, this letter shall not alter, modify, amend, or in any way affect any of the terms, conditions, obligations, covenants or agreements contained in the Letter Agreement (including Appendix A thereto), all of which shall remain in full force and effect.

 

[Signature page follows]






If you agree that the foregoing sets forth our full understanding regarding amendments to the Letter Agreement described herein, please evidence your agreement and acceptance by counter-signing two copies of this letter where indicated below, returning one executed copy to me.

 

HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL OF AMERICA, INC.

 

By:       /s/ Richard Werber

Name:  Richard Werber

Title:    Chief Legal Officer

 

 

AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

 

/s/ Michael O. Johnson

Michael O. Johnson

Date: May 29, 2018

 

Signature Page to Michael O. Johnson Letter Agreement Amendment – May 2018
Processing of APHIS Form 2008s for Prelicensing Serials related to Firm Mergers

ICWI0042.01 Page 1 of 2

Issuing Authority: Renee M. Schnurr

Issue Date: 16May13

Source Document and Date of Issue: VS Memorandum 800.87, Guidelines for Licensing Establishments with 

Separate Premises, May 13, 2005

Background: 

VS Memorandum 800.87, Section IV.E., states that if a submission for a serial (samples, APHIS 

Form 2008 or CVB Test Request) has been received under the original Establishment, the serial 

will be released for marketing under the original Establishment, Product Code, and Serial 

Number.

That does not account for products in which a product license was not granted under the original 

Establishment license, but samples and the APHIS Form 2008 and prelicensing serial testing has 

been started/finished under the original Establishment license. 

If CVB testing has not been requested and performed under the original Establishment license –

this work instruction will not apply.

According to the Reviewer’s Manual, Section 5.1, Testing Biological Products, Requesting 

Tests at the CVB Laboratory – 3.2 Testing of Prelicense Completed/Finished Product, requires 

the manufacturer to test the product and submit the results on an APHIS Form 2008. The 

Reviewer then will authorize submission of samples and request a Special Test.

Process: When CVB has received the 2008 submitted under the original Establishment, samples 

have been submitted and tested under the original Establishment:

1. The Form 2008 will be audited back by either the BCA or the Specialist

a. Reason for Audit – Serial Not Released by APHIS

b. Comment – Product licensed as Est. (NEW), Product Code (XXXX.XX), please 

resubmit information on new APHIS Form 2008 for processing.

c. Also indicate they need to submit two samples under the New Establishment, Product 

Code and Serial number

2. The new Form 2008 should reference the previous Establishment number, Product Code and 

Serial number. When the Form 2008 is received, it will be processed in accordance with normal 

prelicensing procedures:

a. CVB TEST REPORT – testing will not be transferred within the LSRTIS system. 

b. The test report generated under the original Establishment will be printed

i. Use Testing Report: Lab Test Report for Serials – External (2 copies)

ii. Two copies needed – one for the CVB files, one for the firm

c. The original test report is attached to the new APHIS Form 2008

d. The original test report is scanned and attached to the LSRTIS record for the serial 

released under the new Establishment
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 15, 2022 No. 04-22-00429-CV TEXAS FIRST RENTALS, LLC ,

Appellant
v. MONTAGE DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC and Derick Murway, Appellees From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022-CI-08101 Honorable Tina Torres, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R After this court granted Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file the brief, we set Appellant’s brief due on September 14, 2022. On the once-extended due date, Appellant filed an unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file the brief. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is due on October 14, 2022. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.6(d).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 15th day of September, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
WRAP TSS as of 7/15/09Plan02d(tpy)PRP18b(tpy)Net ChangeFrom Plan02dto PRP18b(Percent)Point 11,375 15,709 38Area 1,601 1,756 10On-Road Mobile 0 0 0Off-Road Mobile 0 0 0Oil & Gas 0 0 0Road Dust 160 206 29Fugitive Dust 2,082 2,882 38Windblown Dust 5,838 5,838 0Anthro Fire 242 129 -47Natural Fire 1,535 1,535 0Source CategoryStatewide Fine PMWyoming Planning and Preliminary Reasonable ProgressEmission InventoriesWyoming Fine PM Emission Inventory - 2002 and 2018atu a e,535,5350Biogenic 0 0 0Total22,833 28,055 23Region Scenario Year Point Anthro FireNaturalFire All Fire Biogenic AreaWRAP AreaO&G Off-ShoreOn-RoadMobileOff-RoadMobileRoadDustFugitiveDust WB DustFine Particulate MatterWY Plan02d 2002 11374.80005 241.906 1535.27 1600.86 0 0 0 159.58 2081.71 5838.4076WY Prp18b 2018 15708.96008 128.509 1535.272 1756.44 0 0 0 205.513 2881.94 5838.4076
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005 of
Belden & Blake Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)), for the registrant and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:
March 30, 2006
    
    By:
    
    /s/ James M. VanderhiderJames M. Vanderhider, President and Chief
Financial Officer
bmrn-ex101_6.htm



 

EXHIBIT 10.1

BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC.

2006 Share Incentive Plan 
(as amended and restated on April 16, 2015)
(the “Plan”)

 

Form of Amendment to

Agreement Regarding Restricted Share Units

 

This Amendment (this “Amendment”), effective as of December 5, 2016, is made by and between BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and _________  (“Grantee”).  

WHEREAS, the Company has previously granted Grantee the restricted share unit awards set forth on Exhibit A hereto (the “RSU Awards”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Company and Grantee desire to amend the RSU Awards.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein contained, the Company and Grantee hereby agree as follows:

 


	
1.
	
Definitions.  Unless otherwise defined herein, the terms defined in each award agreement evidencing an RSU Award shall have the same defined meanings in this Amendment.





	
2.
	
Amendment.  Each award agreement evidencing an RSU Award is hereby amended to add the following paragraph following the vesting schedule set forth on such award agreement:




“Notwithstanding the foregoing, if you attain Retirement Eligibility Status, then the Continuous Service requirement set forth above shall be deemed to have been met upon such attainment, and the RSUs shall continue to vest (based on their terms, including the vesting schedule above and any additional vesting provisions that may be contained in other plans of the Company and/or agreements between you and the Company) as if you had remained in Continuous Service to the Company, whether or not you remain in Continuous Service to the Company; provided, however, that such vesting shall cease if your Continuous Service is terminated for Cause.  For purposes hereof, “Retirement Eligibility Status” shall mean that you (a) are age 64 or older; and (b) have been in Continuous Service to the Company for five or more years.”

1

 




	
3.
	
Counterparts.  This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument.





	
4.
	
Ratification.  All other provisions of each award agreement evidencing an RSU Award remain unchanged and are hereby ratified by the Company and Grantee.




[Remainder of the page left intentionally blank]

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the day and year first set forth above.   

 

BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC.

 

By: _____________________________

Name:

Title:

 

 

 

GRANTEE

 

 

_____________________________

Name:




2

 



 

EXHIBIT A

 

 

[list of RSU Awards]
# C_2019164EN.01000202.xml

| 13.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 19 November 2018 — KROL — Zakład Robót Wodno-Kanalizacyjnych Sp. z o.o., S.k. v Porr S.A.

(Case C-722/18)

(2019/C 164/03)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: KROL — Zakład Robót Wodno-Kanalizacyjnych Sp. z o.o., S.k.

Respondent: Porr S.A.

Question referred

Does EU law, in particular recitals 13, 20 and 22 of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in commercial transactions (1) and Article 18 TFEU laying down the principle of non-discrimination, permit the possibility of excluding compensation for late payment in respect of transactions financed in whole or in part by the EU Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, which follows from Article 4(3)(c) of the Ustawa o terminach zapłaty w transakcjach handlowych (Law on Payment Terms in Commercial Transactions)?

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 200, p. 35.

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 131398 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 131398 

 COA: 255255 
 Wayne CC: 04-001097-01

ANTRELL VONIQUE BROWN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 18, 2006 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1023 

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. 

October 31, 2006 

 Clerk
# L_2004277EN.01002601.xml

| 26.8.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 277/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 277/26

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 55/2004

of 23 April 2004

amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 33/2004 of 19 March 2004 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 33/2004 of 19 March 2004 (1).

| (2) | Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2002 on waste statistics (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2002 on waste statistics (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement.

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following shall be inserted after point 26 (Council Directive 90/377/EEC) of Annex XXI to the Agreement:

‘ENVIRONMENTAL STATISTICS

| 27. | 32002 R 2150: Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2002 on waste statistics (OJ L 332, 9.12.2002, p. 1).
  The provisions of the Regulation shall, for the purposes of the present Agreement, be read with the following adaptations:






  (a) | Liechtenstein is exempted from providing the data required by Annex II. |
| --- | --- | --- |

27.

The provisions of the Regulation shall, for the purposes of the present Agreement, be read with the following adaptations:

(a)

Liechtenstein is exempted from providing the data required by Annex II.

| (b) | Liechtenstein shall supply data for the first time in 2008 for the reference year 2006.’ |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Liechtenstein shall supply data for the first time in 2008 for the reference year 2006.’

Article 2

The texts of Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 24 April 2004, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 23 April 2004.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

P. WESTERLUND

---

(1)  
  OJ L 127, 29.4.2004, p. 144.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 332, 9.12.2002, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---