alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.9

Letter from Bruce Bertman requesting conversion of $100,000 debt into 5,343,511
shares of common stock, dated August 18, 2003.

                                        Bruce Bertman

                                        30 West Gude Dr
                                        Suite 470
                                        Rockville MD 20850

August 18, 2003

Mr. Jeff Lieberman
Chairman and President
WorldTeq Group International
30 West Gude Drive
Suite 470
Rockville, MD 20850

RE: Breach of Promissory Note Terms-Conversion

Mr. Lieberman,

In accordance with my letter dated April 21, 2003 in which you were notified the
company of its default in regards to my Promissory Note, you were given 5 days
to cure.  The breach is still in place and has not been cured therefore; This
letter shall serve as demand of my request as per section 7 of my Secured
Convertible Promissory Note to convert $100,000 of the total owed to me as of
this date.  Based on the formula outlined in the note I am able to convert at
the
lower of either .10 per share of the average closing bid price of WTEQ common
stock for the prior 20 day period.  Said price is 1.8714 cents per share as of
the period ended August 18, 2003.

Please immediately issue 5,343,511 shares in my name and as per section 7 effect
a registration statement removing the restrictive legend on the stock.

Best Regards,

/s/ Bruce Bertman
Bruce Bertman


                                                                               1
<PAGE>
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et seq.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

                    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at                     *https://www.federalreserve.gov/​foia/​request.htm.*                     Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).                

Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than March 7, 2024.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago*                     (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President)  230 S LaSalle State, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414. Comments can also be sent electronically to                     *Comments.applications@chi.frb.org.*

                    1.                     *First Financial Corporation, Terre Haute, Indiana;*                     to acquire SimplyBank., Dayton, Tennessee.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Michele Taylor Fennell,

Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2024-02359 Filed 2-5-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Amarillo Mesquite Grill, Inc:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (nos.
33-72320, 33-95480 and 333-44227) on Form S-8 of Amarillo Mesquite Grill, Inc.
of our report dated March 20, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of Amarillo Mesquite Grill, Inc. as of January 25, 1998 and January 26, 1997,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
(deficit) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
January 25, 1998, which report appears in the January 25, 1998 annual report on
Form 10-K of Amarillo Mesquite Grill, Inc.



                                                   /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
                                                   --------------------------
                                                   KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Wichita, Kansas
April 17, 1998
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE GUADALUPE MENDOZAMARIN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-70826

Agency No. A077-056-703

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Jose Guadalupe Mendoza-Marin, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his

appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for

cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

FILED

MAR 07 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-70826

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that

Mendoza-Marin failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a

qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.

2005). Mendoza-Marin’s contention that the agency applied an incorrect legal

standard in making its hardship determination is not supported by the record and

does not amount to a colorable legal or constitutional claim. See Mendez-Castro v.

Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Mendoza-Marin’s contention that the IJ

abused her discretion by failing to grant a continuance because he failed to exhaust

that issue before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.

2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10080-10081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02873]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1009(d), notice is hereby given of the 
following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Office of 
Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, 
CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the 
discussions could disclose confidential

[[Page 10081]]

trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)--DP24-138, Demonstration Projects 
to Research and Evaluate Strategies Aligned with CDC's What Works in 
Schools Approach.
    Date: May 21, 2024.
    Time: 10 a.m.-6 p.m., EDT.
    Place: Teleconference/Web Conference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    For Further Information Contact: Catherine Barrett, Ph.D., 
Scientific Review Officer, National Center for Chronic Disease 
Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, Mailstop S106-3, Atlanta, Georgia 
30341-3717. Telephone: (404) 718-7664; Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0a49486b78786f7e7e4a696e69246d657c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c78485a6b5b5a2b3b387a4a3a4e9a0a8b1">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of 
the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register 
notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee 
management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2024-02873 Filed 2-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Registrant is a limited partnership which invests in real estate, and
real estate joint ventures.  In accordance with industry practice, its
balance sheet is unclassified.  For full information, refer to the
accompanying audited financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,355,995
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   75,928
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,174,590<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,966,128<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,174,590<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,131,337<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               652,682
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                478,655
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            478,655
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   478,655
<EPS-BASIC>                                     4.64<F5>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net investments
in real estate of $6,695,332 and net deferred leasing commissions of
$47,335.
<F2>Represents partners' capital.
<F3>Liabilities include accounts payable and other liabilities of $208,462.
<F4>Total revenue includes rent of $1,060,291 and interest and
other revenue of $71,046.
<F5>Represents net income per Unit of limited partnership interest.
</FN>


</TABLE>
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 14

- 00599

- CV

Agua Special Utility District

v. Leopoldo Ramirez and Sylvia Ann Ramirez

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 8 of Hidalgo County , Texas

Trial Cause No. CCD

- 0104

- H

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certifi ed below for observance.

February 19, 2015
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1271 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income 

amounts received on the sale of animals which are raised and sold 

as part of an educational program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2011 

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

from gross income amounts received on the sale of animals which are raised and sold as part of an educational 

program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Agriculture Education 

5 Freedom Act’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1271 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR AMOUNTS 

2 RECEIVED ON SALE OF ANIMALS WHICH ARE 

3 RAISED AND SOLD AS PART OF EDU4 CATIONAL PROGRAM. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B of chap6 ter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 

7 by inserting after section 139D the following new section: 

8 ‘‘SEC. 139E. PROCEEDS OF SALE OF ANIMALS RAISED AND 

9 SOLD AS PART OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM. 

10 ‘‘In the case of an individual, gross income shall not 

11 include any gain from the sale of any animal which is 

12 raised and sold by such individual as part of such individ13 ual’s participation in— 

14 ‘‘(1) the 4–H program under the Cooperative 

15 State Research, Education, and Extension Service of 

16 the Department of Agriculture, 

17 ‘‘(2) the Future Farmers of America, 

18 ‘‘(3) any program of an organization described 

19 in section 501(c) and exempt from tax under section 

20 501(a) which is similar to such 4–H program or the 

21 Future Farmers of America, or 

22 ‘‘(4) any program of an educational organiza23 tion described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii).’’. 

24 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

25 for such part III is amended by inserting after the item 

26 relating to section 139D the following new item: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1271 IH

‘‘Sec. 139E. Proceeds of sale of animals raised and sold as part of educational 

program.’’. 

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 this section shall apply to sales in taxable years ending 

3 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
| Name                                                               |   | Percentage Owned |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------|
|  Sichuan Apollo Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd.      |   |             | 100 | %  (Owned by Apollo Solar Energy, Inc.) |
|  Sichuan Xinlong Telurium Industry & Technique Co., Ltd.  |   |             | 100 | %  (Owned by Sichuan Apollo Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd) |
|  Sichuan Shimian Dadu River Mining & Metallurgy Co., Ltd. |   |             | 100 | %  (Owned by Sichuan Xinlong Telurium Industry & Technique Co., Ltd) |

----
#### Pat Dan McCOY, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 32080.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 22, 1960.

Clyde W. Woody, John J. Browne, Houston, for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Samuel H. Robertson, Jr., Jon N. Hughes, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and ]>on B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for tne State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is felony theft; the punishment, ten years.

It was stipulated by appellant and his counsel that the testimony taken on the examining trial should be admitted. It is as follows:

The witness Greenlee, a Mobil oil dealer in the City of Houston, observed appellant in the stockroom of his station on the day charged in the indictment, and, when being asked what he was doing there, answered that he wanted to wash his hands, but the witness noticed that appellant’s hands appeared to be clean. Later in the day, Green-lee discovered that twelve boxes of Champion spark plugs of the total value of $66 were missing from the stockroom.

The witness Benavides testified that he saw appellant “running out of the back stockroom — where the spark plugs were located” with a box under his arm, that he ran to an automobile and left. The witness Albritton testified that he saw appellant coming out of the service station with “merchandise” under his arm, that he took the license number of the automobile in which appellant left, reported the same to the police, and later identified appellant in a police lineup.

We overrule appellant’s contention that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction and address ourselves to his principal contentions that the record before us here affirmatively reflects that he was not admonished of the consequences of a plea of guilty or that he entered any plea whatsoever to the indictment.

The judgment recites that appellant was admonished and that he entered a plea of guilty. Appellant takes the position that *946the statement of facts refutes such recitation and should control. There is no showing in the record that these two prerequisites to the entry of a valid plea of guilty were not complied with. At most, the record is silent on the question. To agree with appellant’s contention would result in a reversal of a majority of the cases which reach this Court because the proceedings relating to the entry of pleas are not evidence adduced upon the trial and are not incorporated in the statements of fact.

The recent case of Alexander v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 53, 288 S.W.2d 779, upon which appellant relies, can have no application here because in that case the question óf the failure of appellant to plead was preserved by a proper bill of exception.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
From: "Ueno Christine, R3L MTU Detroit Diesel Inc." <Christine.Ueno@mtu-online.com>

To: <kopinski.donald@epa.gov>

Date: 09/16/2010 05:31 PM

Subject: 1033.625(a)(1)

First, Don, are you still the contact person for locomotive regulations? If not, can you please pass this to 

the correct person. While this issue is not yet a cert issue for us, it may become an issue for our 

locomotive chassis partner so we are trying to resolve it before it does become an issue.

It looks like 40 CFR Part 1033.150(e) allows engine manufactures to build nonroad engines built to 89 to 

1039 , while 1033.625(a)(2) allows locomotive manufactures to build locomotives with engines to 

standards that are numerically lower than the 1033. However, the nonroad CO limit in part 1039 is not 

numerically lower than the CO limit in Part 1033. Therefore, it would be impossible to use this provision 

as there is no standard that is numerically lower than the Part 1033 CO limit. This may not be an issue 

for engine suppliers that certify to the provisions of 1033.150(e), since the locomotives are exempt from 

Part 92 and 1033. But, this becomes a real issue for loco builders who want certify nonroad engines to 

loco standards in their loco certification. According to the NPRM preamble, this is the long term 

solution but it may never be a viable solution.

40 CFR Part 1039 CO standard 3.5 g/kW-hr

40 CFR Part 1033 CO standard 2.4 g/bhp-hr (switch) or 3.2 g/kW-hr

Was this intentional? I do not believe that EPA meant to constrict loco certifiers this way. This may have 

simply been an oversight. What do you think?

If you have any questions, please let me know.

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

Christine Ueno

Manager, Regulatory Compliance

MTU Detroit Diesel, Inc.

13400 Outer Drive, West

Detroit, MI 48239

Office: +1(313)592 5427

Mobile: +1(313)401 3681

Fax: +1(313)592 7616

Email: Christine.Ueno@mtu-online.com

Web: www.mtu-online.com

a Tognum Group Company
#### Gussie LONG, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 36611.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 4, 1964.

Milton H. Mulitz, Houston, for appellant.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally, James I. Smith, Jr., and Sidney Farmer, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.

The offense is drunk driving; the punishment, 30 days in jail and a fine of $250.

Texas Highway Patrolman Barnfield testified that he observed the appellant driving his automobile on a public highway in Harris County at a speed of about 10 miles per hour.' He stopped the appellant after observing that the car he was driving was weaving onto the shoulder and across the center line of the highway. He assisted the appellant from his car, observed that his speech was incoherent, his words were “jerky”, his eyes were red and glassy, his face was flushed, and he had a strong odor of alcohol on his breath. (The witness also testified as to how the appellant walked, and that he had a physical disability.)

*914The witness Barnfield expressed the opinion that the appellant was intoxicated.

Herbert Force, who was riding with Patrolman Barnfield, also expressed the opinion, based upon his observation of him after his arrest, that the appellant was intoxicated.

The appellant testified that he had been fishing with his wife, had consumed only-three bottles of beer, and was not intoxicated.

Appellant’s wife, who was with him when he was stopped, was not called as a witness for the appellant.

The jury resolved the issue as to ap-. pellant’s intoxication against him and the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.

Over the objection that she was not on trial and that the evidence was immaterial and irrelevant to any question involved in this particular case, the witness Barn-field was permitted to testify that appellant’s wife was also, in his opinion, intoxicated.

The witness Force, over similar objection, also testified that he smelled alcohol on her breath and formed the opinion that the lady was intoxicated.

We see no error. Andrews v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 550, 279 S.W.2d 331; Watkins v. State, 165 Tex.Cr.R. 20, 302 S.W.2d 435; McClain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 372 S.W.2d 341.

The remaining complaint relates to the admissibility of testimony of the witness Force to the effect that appellant’s wife had a pistol.

The question, answer and the objection overruled were:

> “Q. Did you have occasion to see anything unusual in the person of the woman who was there?

> "A. When we were about ready to leave, there was a pistol brought out”

> Appellant’s counsel: “Objection to that your Honor.”

The overruling of such objection does not constitute ground for reversal.

Even so, the appellant thereafter testified that his wife had a pistol with her at the time he was stopped.

No error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.