alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re RICHARDSON’S GUARDIANSHIP.

No. 35636.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Feb. 10, 1953.

William T. Powell, Walters, for petitioners.

Walter Hubbell and Luther Eubanks, Walters, for respondents.

WILLIAMS, Justice.

I. A. Richardson and Ethel Pults filed a petition in the County Court of Cotton County, alleging the incompetency of their half-brother, G. B. Richardson, and asking that a guardian be appointed for him. Hearing was had as provided by law, at the conclusion of which the County Judge found him to be incompetent and appointed a guardian. Appeal was taken to the District Court by the said G. B. Richardson, where trial was had de novo. At the conclusion of petitioners’ evidence, respondent G. B. Richardson demurred thereto; the demurrer was sustained; judgment was entered for respondent; petitioners thereupon gave notice in open court of intentions to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Petition in error presents three allegations of error; that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer; that the court erred in not rendering judgment for petitioners; that the court erred in his statement of fact (summarizing the evidence). It is evident that a determination of any one of these three allegations of error would require a review of the evidence by this court.

 A Motion to Dismiss Appeal has been filed in this court by respondent G. B. Richardson for the reason that no Motion for New Trial was filed and ruled upon, and that therefore this court is without jurisdiction to review the ruling of the trial court. This point, is well taken. In *566Gilliam v. Juccion, 203 Okl. 69, 218 P.2d 380, we held:

> “The ruling' on a demurrer to the evidence is a ‘decision occurring on the trial’, and in order to enable the Supreme Court to review such ruling it is necessary that a motion for new trial be filed within the time prescribed by law.”

See Ardmore Oil & Milling Co. v. Doggett Grain Co., 32 Okl. 280, 122 P. 241, for an identical ruling. See also O’Balliet v. Lillard, 205 Okl. 467, 238 P.2d 798; and In re Duncan, 129 Okl. 125, 263 P. 1083.

Appeal dismissed.

HALLEY, C. J., JOHNSON, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, DAVISON, O’NEAL and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur.
# C_2012126EN.01001301.xml

| 28.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 126/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 126/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2012 — Coverpla v OHIM — Heinz-Glas (Phial)

(Case T-450/08) (1)

1

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a bottle - Prior design - Ground for invalidity - Disclosure of prior design - Absence of novelty - Articles 5 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

2012/C 126/25

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Coverpla (Nice, France) (represented by: P. Greffe and M. Chaminade, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Heinz-Glas GmbH (Piesau, Germany) (represented by: M. Pütz-Poulalion, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 July 2008 (Case R 1411/2007-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Heinz-Glas GmbH and Coverpla in respect of a Community design

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Coverpla to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Coverpla to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 10.1.2009.

1

---
# C_2009113EN.01004404.xml

| 16.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/44

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 March 2009 — Portugal v Commission

(Case T-378/08) (1)

1

2009/C 113/91

Language of the case: Portuguese

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 285, 8.11.2008.

1

---
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 449 

AN ACT 

To require the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service 

to submit to Congress a report on the health effects 

of new psychoactive substances (including synthetic 

drugs) use. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 449 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Synthetic Drug Aware3 ness Act of 2018’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REPORT ON EFFECTS ON PUBLIC HEALTH OF SYN5 THETIC DRUG USE. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after the 

7 date of the enactment of this Act, the Surgeon General 

8 of the Public Health Service shall submit to Congress a 

9 report on the health effects of new psychoactive substances 

10 (including synthetic drugs) used since January 2010 by 

11 persons who are at least 12 years of age but no more than 

12 18 years of age. 

13 (b) NEW PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCE DEFINED.— 

14 For purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘‘new 

15 psychoactive substance’’ means a controlled substance 

16 analogue (as defined in section 102(32) of the Controlled 

17 Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(32)). 

Passed the House of Representatives June 12, 2018. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 449 

AN ACT 

To require the Surgeon General of the Public 

(including synthetic drugs) use. the health effects of new psychoactive substances Health Service to submit to Congress a report on
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 4.8

                                 June 3, 1998



VIA FACSIMILE
-------------

New Enterprises Associates VII LP


     Re: Exercise of Warrants/Issuance of Common Stock
         ---------------------------------------------

Gentlemen:

     This letter confirms that SyQuest Technology, Inc. ("SyQuest") and New
Enterprises Associates VII LP ("Warrant Holder") agree as follows:

     1.  Warrant Holder will exercise 1,000,000 shares of Warrant No. 60 it
received in connection with its purchase of the company's 5% Cumulative
Convertible Preferred Stock, Series 4 to acquire 1,000,000 shares of the
Company's common stock for total proceeds of $3,046,900 (the "Proceeds").

     2.  Upon receipt of the proceeds, plus an additional $169.64 representing
the par value for an additional 1,696,372 shares (the "Additional Common
Shares") of the Company's common stock, the Company will issue a total of
2,696,372 shares of common stock to Warrant Holder.

     3.  The Additional Common Shares shall have piggy-back registration rights
so that they will be registered in a future registration statement consistent
with existing Company contractual obligations regarding registrations, provided
however that the Company agrees to register such shares no later than September
25, 1998, subject to delays caused by reasonable business considerations, but in
any event agrees to register such shares no later than shares issued to RGC
International, CC Investments, Combination, Inc. and Fletcher International from
those transactions represented in SyQuest's 8-K dated March and April of 1998.

     4.  The Proceeds plus the additional $169.64 will be wire-transferred to
the following account:  Bank of America, 1850 Gateway Blvd., 4th Floor, Concord,
CA 94520, ABA #121-000-358, Account #12334-56287.

     5.  The Company will deliver the shares of common stock issued upon
exercise of the warrants in accordance with the terms of the warrants, and it
will direct its transfer agent to deliver such shares electronically without a
restrictive legend provided
<PAGE>
 
that Warrant Holder complies with the applicable prospectus delivery
requirements under the Securities Act of 1933 and provides notice to the Company
using the attached form.

     The Company acknowledges that Warrant Holder is relying on information
disclosed in the Company's public filings with the SEC and confirms that it is
aware of no material misstatements or omissions in those filings.

ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED:

SyQuest Technology, Inc.                  New Enterprises Associates VII LP
 
 
 
/s/                                     /s/
--------------------------------------  -------------------------------------
Michael Clemens                         Authorized representative
Acting Chief Financial Officer
**Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 May 2009 – Guigard v Commission**

**(Case C‐214/08 P)**

Appeal – Action for damages – Conditions governing the incurral by the Community of contractual and non‐contractual liability – Articles 313(2)(k), 314 and 317(a) of the Fourth Convention of Lomé, as revised by the Agreement signed in Mauritius

Procedure – Actions for damages (Arts 225(1) EC, 235 EC, 238 EC and 240 EC) (see paras 39-43)

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 11 March 2008 in Case T‐301/05 | Guigard | v | Commission | , by which the Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s action for damages for the loss which he allegedly suffered by reason of the Commission’s conduct with regard to the non‐renewal of his contract of employment concluded in the framework of technical co‐operation between the Community and the Republic of Niger financed by the European Development Fund – Conditions governing the incurral by the Community of non-contractual liability – Infringement of Articles 313(2)(k) and 314 of the Fourth Convention of Lomé (OJ 1991 L 229, p. 1), as revised by the Agreement signed in Mauritius (OJ 1998 L 156, p. 3) – Infringement of the obligation to state reasons and of the rights of the defence. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T‐301/05 Guigard v Commission inasmuch as it declared the action brought by Mr Guigard to be admissible; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Dismisses the action brought by Mr Guigard in Case T‐301/05; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Declares that it is not necessary to rule on the appeal brought by Mr Guigard; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4. | | Orders Mr Guigard to pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities before the Court of Justice of the European Communities and before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities. |
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1147 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 128 ) IV-E- 1 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:54

PM Sheet 128 of 242^ 0 8 * > ,

%p* ^ \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 P. 2 

# znz

# -&-o 

# i

SE P 9I9S I OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT :

FROM : Visi t t o NIPE R During Breathing/Emptyin g Los s

Emissio n Testing Glenn W . passavant , Senio r Projec t Manage r ^&"~fr J f < ^A*vr ^ Standard s Developmen t an d Suppor t Branc h TO : THRU : Publi c Docke t A-87-1 1

Cheste r J . France , Chi e Standard s Developmen t O n Augus t 12 , 198 7 Joh n F . Anderso n an

d I visite d th e Nationa l Institut e fo r Petroleu man d Energ yResearc h (NIPER ) t o discus s th e earl yresult s o f thei r breathing/emptyin g los s emissio n testing progra man d t o observ e the testing ongoin g a t tha t time . Mr . Willia mF . Marshal l describe d NIPER' s experimenta l approach , testing set-up , an d measuremen t technique , an

d then presente d preliminaryresult s o f the two day s o f breathing los s measuremen t test s an d four day s o f combine d breathing/emptyin g los s measurement s uncontrolle d system (n o Stag e II) . Measurement s o f breathing/emptyin g losse s wit h a Stag e I I balanc e being conducte d during our visit . W e observe d testing an

d viewe d th e rea l time stri p char t pressure , an

d H C concentratio n results . day s on a n combine d systemwer e the ongoing temperature ,P. 3

I n viewing the testing o f the balanc e system(Stag e II ) w e notice d tha t step s wer e no t take n t o ensur e tha t th e vapo r spac e i n the vehicl e fue l tan k an d barre l being use d t o receiv e the fue l wer e saturate d wit h H C vapo r befor e testing . Ther e wa s war

mresidua l fue l (80°F+ ) i n thes e tanks , an d some soa

k perio d (1/ 2 hour or more ) occurre d betwee n test s a t ambien t temperature s o f betwee n 8 0 an d 95°F . Undoubtedl ysome vapo r wa s present , bu t w e suggeste d tha t the protoco l b e revise d t o formall yinclud e a tan k soak perio d wit h war mfuel . Mr . Marshal l concurre d wit h thi s suggestion . Testing fo r breathing/emptyin g losse s wit h a Stag e l i balanc e systemwa s no t schedule d fo r completio n unti l Augus t 14 , 1987 , s o tim e wa s availabl e t o accommodat e suc h changes . W e als o suggeste d tha t a s a followo n experimen t i t migh t b e valuabl e t o measur e combine d breathing/emptyin g los s emission s on a n uncontrolle d systemwhic h incorporate s a pressure/vacuu mvalv e i n th e ven t tube . Result s an

d analysi s o f the NIPE R stud yar e expecte d t o b e availabl e b

yth e en

d o f Augus t 1987 .
Exhibit 10.4 (b)

                                AMENDMENT TO
                           COST SHARING AGREEMENT


              This Amendment to Cost Sharing Agreement (the AAmendment@) is made
     as of the 29th day of August,  1997, by and between  AMERICO LIFE,  INC., a
     Missouri  corporation,  GREAT  SOUTHERN  LIFE  INSURANCE  COMPANY,  a Texas
     corporation  (AGreat  Southern@),  PREMIUM FINANCING  SPECIALISTS,  INC., a
     Missouri  corporation,  LANDMARK MORTGAGE COMPANY, a Missouri  corporation,
     UNITED FIDELITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,  a Texas  corporation,  THE COLLEGE
     LIFE  INSURANCE  COMPANY  OF  AMERICA,  a Texas  corporation,  PFS  HOLDING
     COMPANY,  a Missouri  corporation,  LOYALTY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas
     corporation (ALoyalty@), and NATIONAL FARMERS UNION LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
     a Texas corporation.

              WHEREAS,  the  parties  entered  into that  certain  Cost  Sharing
     Agreement dated as of July 30, 1993 (the AAgreement@); and

              WHEREAS,  on August 29, 1997,  Great Southern  intends to sell all
     the outstanding stock of Loyalty to Healthcare COMPARE Corp.; and

              WHEREAS,  to  facilitate  such sale of stock,  the parties wish to
     amend the  Agreement  to remove  Loyalty  from the  Agreement in the manner
     provided herein;

              NOW,  THEREFORE,  in  consideration of the premises and other good
     and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
     acknowledged,  the parties hereto agree that,  effective as of the close of
     business on August 29, 1997, the Agreement shall cease to apply to Loyalty,
     and  Loyalty  shall  thereafter  have no  rights or  obligations  under the
     Agreement.


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


     AMERICO LIFE, INC.                      GREAT SOUTHERN LIFE INSURANCE
                                             COMPANY

     By                                      By
         Name                                Name
         Title                               Title
<PAGE>

     PREMIUM FINANCING                       LANDMARK MORTGAGE COMPANY
     SPECIALISTS, INC.

     By                                      By
         Name                                Name
         Title                               Title

     UNITED FIDELITY LIFE                    THE COLLEGE LIFE INSURANCE
     INSURANCE COMPANY                       COMPANY OF AMERICA

     By                                      By
         Name                                Name
         Title                               Title

     PFS HOLDING COMPANY                     LOYALTY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

     By                                      By
         Name                                Name
         Title                               Title

     NATIONAL FARMERS UNION
     LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

     By
         Name
         Title
#### In the Matter of Otis Odell C.

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Nassau County Surrogate’s Court, Radigan, S. (Appeal from Order of Nassau County Surrogate’s Court, Radigan, S. — Adoption.) Present — Denman, J. P., Green, Balio, Lowery and Davis, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.1






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002






In
connection with the Quarterly Report of  A J&J PHARMA CORPORATION,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Kevin Ericksteen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






/s/ Kevin
Ericksteen


Kevin
Ericksteen


Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer




Date: September
18, 2008
---



Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tari Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  February 13, 2009

/s/ Theodore Tsagkaris

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

Theodore Tsagkaris

President, C.E.O. and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)





---
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 452 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.452

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 324 West Saint Louis Street in Pacific, Missouri, as the ``Specialist 
                  Jeffrey L. White, Jr. Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SPECIALIST JEFFREY L. WHITE, JR. POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 324 West Saint Louis Street in Pacific, Missouri, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Specialist Jeffrey L. White, Jr. Post 
Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Specialist 
Jeffrey L. White, Jr. Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
staf-ex102_474.htm



Exhibit 10.2

 

As of October 14, 2016

 

Re:  Staffing 360 Solutions, Inc.

 

Reference is made to that certain 8% Senior Secured Convertible Debenture (the “Debenture”) due April 1, 2017 with an original issue date of July 8, 2015 made by Staffing 360 Solutions, Inc. (“Staffing”) in favor of Hillair Capital Investments L.P. or its registered assigns (collectively, “Hillair”) in the original principal amount of $3,920,000.  Any terms not otherwise defined in this letter agreement (this “Agreement”) shall have the meanings set forth under the Debenture.  This Agreement, amends and restates in its entirety that certain letter agreement, dated October 3, 2016.  

 

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in the Debenture, Hillair and Staffing hereby agree that: 

 


	
 
	
(1)
	
effective as of October 3, 2016, Hillair shall convert an aggregate amount of $980,000.00 of indebtedness under the Debenture (the “Conversion Amount”), currently due October 3, 2016, into 890,910 shares of Common Stock of Staffing (the “Conversion Shares”), and




 


	
 
	
(2)
	
upon receipt of the Conversion Shares as set forth hereunder, the aggregate principal amount of the Debenture, and the next Periodic Redemption Amount, shall be reduced by the Conversion Amount (as set forth on the books and records of Staffing).




 

The parties agree that the total cumulative amount of shares issued to Hillair may not exceed the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5635(d).  Staffing represents and warrants that the conversion of the indebtedness under the Debenture into Conversion Shares pursuant to this Agreement is exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act.

 

In addition, the parties also agree that to the extent that Hillair’s conversion would result in Hillair exceeding the Beneficial Ownership Limitation of the Debentures (as set forth in Section 4(d) of the Debenture), then Hillair shall not be entitled to receive the Conversion Shares to such extent (or beneficially own of such shares of Common Stock as a result of such conversion to such extent) and such excess Conversion Shares shall be held in abeyance for Hillair until such time, if ever, as its right thereto would not result in Hillair exceeding the Beneficial Ownership Limitation.

 

Delivery of the Conversion Shares shall be otherwise governed by Section 4 of the Debenture, including the timing of delivery and compensation and/or rescission rights for failure to deliver or delivery on a timely basis.  Except as otherwise provided herein, this agreement shall not modify or amend in any way the terms of the Debenture.  

 

Section 9(d) (Governing Law) of the Debenture is hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

 


		
	
HILLAIR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS L.P.

 

/s/ Sean M. McAvoy

By:  Sean M. McAvoy

Title:  Managing Member

Hillair Capital Advisors LLC
	
STAFFING 360 SOLUTIONS, INC.

 

/s/ Brendan Flood

By:  Brendan Flood

Title:  Executive Chairman