alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
eaui_ex106.htm


Exhibit 10.6









SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED PROMISSORY NOTE







This Second Amended and Restated Promissory Note (this “Amendment”) is made this 7th day of August, 2014, by and between EAU Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Peter F. Ullrich, a resident of Florida (“Lender”).







BACKGROUND







WHEREAS, Company and Holder executed and delivered that certain Amended And Restated Promissory Note to the Original Note, dated November 18, 2013 (the “First Amendment”); and







WHEREAS, Company and Holder executed and delivered that certain Promissory Note, dated May 15, 2013, in the original amount of $80,000 (the “Original Note”).







WHEREAS, Company and Holder desire to execute and deliver this Amendement to the Original Note.







NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:







1.           Section 4(a) of the Original Note is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is hereby inserted in its place:







  Maturity Date.  Accrued interest and the outstanding principal balance shall be due and payable in a single lump-sum payment on May 15, 2015 (the “Maturity Date”).







2.           Except as expressly set forth herein, the Original Note shall remain unchanged and unmodified and in full force and effect.







3.           All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in the Amendment shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Original Note.







4.           This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto were in the same instrument.







(Remainder of page intentionally left blank)


 


 




  





 











  






 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this Agreement on the date first written above.


 


 




	 	 
COMPANY:

	 
	 	 	 
	 	EAU TECHNOLOGIES, INC.	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	
By: 

	/s/ Brian D. Heinhold	 
	 	 	 
Brian D. Heinhold

	 
	 	 	 
Chief Financial Officer

	 
	 	 	 	 







 




	 	 
LENDER:

	 
	 	 	 
	 	 
PETER F. ULLRICH

	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	
By: 

	/s/ Peter F. Ullrich	 
	 	 	 
Peter F. Ullrich

	 















2
EX-10.19



 Exhibit 10.19 

[RPM International Inc. Letterhead] 
 Paul G. P.
Hoogenboom 
             
                             

            
                             

Dear Paul: 
 This letter confirms our mutual agreement to the
terms of your Employment Agreement (“Agreement”) effective December 31, 2008, as modified to reflect your current assignment as President of Tremco Incorporated (“Tremco”). All capitalized terms used in this letter agreement
have the same meaning as under the Agreement and all section references refer to the same section under the Agreement. 

Section 2 — The Company and the Executive agree that Executive will resign from his duties as Senior Vice President —
Manufacturing and Operations and Chief Information Officer of the Company, so that he can devote all of his current time and efforts to his duties as President of Tremco, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. 

Section 4 — The Company acknowledges that Executive’s change in duties will not alter his eligibility for and/or
participation in the Company’s Benefit Plans and other items of direct and indirect compensation enumerated in Section 4. 

Section 6(a) — Executive agrees that his change in duties does not constitute a significant reduction in the nature and scope
of his title, authority or responsibilities that would constitute Good Reason in the event of a Change in Control. 
 Section 20
— The Company and Executive agree that for purposes of Section 20, the terms of this Letter Agreement are made a part of the Agreement as if originally included therein. 

In all other respects, the Company and Executive agree that the remaining terms of the Agreement continue if full force and effect. 

Please signify your agreement with the above by signing both copies of this Letter Agreement. Please retain one copy for your records and return the other to
me. 
 Very truly yours, 
 /s/ Frank C. Sullivan 

Frank C. Sullivan 
 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer 

Accepted this 31st day of May, 2014: 
  

	
	 /s/ Paul G. P. Hoogenboom

	Paul G. P. Hoogenboom
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 Geovic Mining Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael T. Mason, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my 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: May 9, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Michael T. Mason                    
|                  |  |     |  | Michael T. Mason Chief
Executive Officer
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and result of operations                of                Bedminster Capital Corp. |

**BEDMINSTER      CAPITAL CORP.**

| By:    | */s/                Paul Patrizio*                                                                    |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | PAUL                PATRIZIO                                                                          |
|                  | President,                Chief Executive Officer,  Chief Financial                Officer, |
NUMBER 13-14-00446-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

DEAN SPRINGER AND INTEGRITY 

FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., Appellants,

v.

LYDIA TUMMEL, ET. AL., Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 332nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

ORDER ABATING APPEAL

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides

Order Per Curiam

On August 20, 2014, appellant, Dean Springer, filed a notice of bankruptcy in this 

appeal. According to the notice, appellant filed a bankruptcy petition on June 3, 2014, in 

the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. 
2

Upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition, an automatic stay becomes effective which 

prohibits the commencement or continuation of any judicial action or proceeding against 

the debtor and any property within the debtor's bankruptcy estate. See 11 U.S.C.A. '

362(a). Pursuant to Rule 8.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the appeal is 

suspended. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. 

Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED until further order of this Court. Any 

documents filed subsequent to the bankruptcy petition will remain pending until the appeal 

is reinstated. The parties are directed to take such action as is appropriate to advise the 

Court of any change in the status of the bankruptcy proceeding which would affect the 

status of this appeal, including but not limited to, the filing of a motion to reinstate pursuant 

to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 8.3. See id. 8.3.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

29th day of August, 2014.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 281

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify that forced or indentured labor

includes forced or indentured child labor.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21, 1999

Mr. HARKIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify that forced

or indentured labor includes forced or indentured child labor.

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

3 SECTION 1. FORCED OR INDENTURED CHILD LABOR.

4 Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.

5 1307) is amended by adding at the end the following new

6 sentence: ‘‘For purposes of this section, the term ‘forced

7 labor or/and indentured labor’ includes forced or inden8 tured child labor.’’.

Æ
NOTIFICATION TO ENROLLEE OF ADULT CHILD’S REQUEST TO BE REMOVED 

Dear (enrollee’s name): 

Your adult child (insert family member(s) name) has requested to be removed from your Federal 

Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program enrollment. 

(Name of adult child)’s FEHB coverage ends effective XXXX, XX, 20XX 

(Name of adult child) is not eligible for the 31-day temporary extension of coverage, conversion 

to an individual policy, or temporary continuation of coverage (TCC). 

A removed child may only regain coverage under your Self Plus One or Self and Family 

enrollment if requested by you during the annual Federal Benefits Open Season or within 60 

days of the child losing other health insurance coverage. You must provide written consent to 

reinstate coverage from the adult child and demonstrate eligibility of the adult child as a family 

member. 

This is not an opportunity to change plans, plan options or enrollment type. 

Regards, 

__________________________________________________________________________

NOTIFICATION TO ADULT CHILD OR SPOUSE OF REMOVAL FROM FEHB 

Dear (family member’s name): 

(Enrollee’s Name) has requested that you be removed from (his/her) Federal Employees Health 

Benefits (FEHB) Program Self and Family (or Self Plus One) enrollment. 

Your coverage ends effective XXXX, XX, 20XX 

You are not eligible for the 31-day temporary extension of coverage, conversion to an individual 

policy, or temporary continuation of coverage (TCC). 

You can only regain coverage under the applicable Self Plus One or Self and Family enrollment 

if requested by the enrollee during the annual Federal Benefits Open Season or within 60 days of 

you losing other health insurance coverage. 

Regards,
#### Wisconsin Employment Relations Board, Respondent, vs. Gateway Glass Company, Appellant.

*October 7*

November *3, 1953.*

*117For the appellant the cause was submitted on the briefs of *Lees & Bunge*of La Crosse.

For the respondent there was a brief by the *Attorney General*and *Stewart G. Honeck,*deputy attorney general, and *Beatrice Lampert,*assistant attorney general, and oral argument by *Mrs. Lampert.*

Gehl, J.

The question is: Does the contract require payment of wages as therein specified to employees hired before and in the employment of the company at its effective date? The company contends that the term “hiring rate” can refer only to the rate to be paid employees entering the service after the date of the contract. The board and the trial court concluded that it does not, and that it applies to all employees.

The term is ambiguous. It is undisputed that the contract was prepared by the company. There is applicable the familiar rule that doubtful language in a contract is to be interpreted most strongly against the person who drew it. *Hoffmann v. Danielson,*251 Wis. 34, 27 N. W. (2d) 759.

The meaning of the term “hiring rate” as it is used in the contract is open to more than one interpretation. It is therefore proper for us to consider the reasonableness of one meaning as compared with that of the other, the probability that persons situated as the parties were would be expected to contract in one way as against the other. It is not likely that the union when bargaining for increased wages would be concerned only with those persons who mi^ht enter the company’s employment after the date of the contract. It would be unreasonable to assume that the union had no interest in the people then employed, the only people it then represented in its negotiations with the company. Nor does it seem likely that the company would consider that the union was not interested in those at the time employed and represented by it.

*118“Under recognized rules of interpretation of contracts, where one construction would make a contract unusual and extraordinary while another equally consistent with the language used would make it reasonable, just, and fair, the latter must prevail.” *Bank of Cashton v. La Crosse C. S. T. M. I. Co.*216 Wis. 513, 518, 257 N. W. 451.

We construe the term as being applicable to employees in service at the time of the making of the agreement as well as to those to be employed thereafter.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3641 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3641

    To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to ensure health 
         insurance coverage continuity for former foster youth.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 29, 2015

 Ms. Bass (for herself, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Doggett, Mrs. 
Watson Coleman, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Cardenas, Mr. Conyers, 
 Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr. 
 Garamendi, Mr. Rangel, Ms. Norton, Mr. Payne, Ms. Clarke of New York, 
 Ms. Kaptur, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Ms. Slaughter, Ms. Wilson of 
 Florida, Mr. DeSaulnier, Mr. Pocan, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, Mr. Kind, 
 Mr. Lewis, Mr. Butterfield, Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. 
  Hastings, Mr. Van Hollen, and Mr. Ellison) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to ensure health 
         insurance coverage continuity for former foster youth.

    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 ``Health Insurance for Former Foster 
Youth Act''.

SEC. 2. COVERAGE CONTINUITY FOR FORMER FOSTER CARE CHILDREN UP TO AGE 
              26.

    (a) In General.--Section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(IX) of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)(IX)) is amended--
            (1) in item (bb), by striking ``are not described in or 
        enrolled under'' and inserting ``are not described in and are 
        not enrolled under'';
            (2) in item (cc), by striking ``responsibility of the 
        State'' and inserting ``responsibility of a State''; and
            (3) in item (dd), by striking ``the State plan under this 
        title or under a waiver of the'' and inserting ``a State plan 
        under this title or under a waiver of such a''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20

- 1661 V

UNPUBLISHED

TAMMY SWEENEY

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: February 25, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;
Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Nancy Routh Meyers, Turning Point Litigation, Greensboro, NC , for Petitioner.

Christine Mary Becer

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On November 23, 2020

, Tammy Sweeney filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she s uffered a s houlder injury related to vaccine

ad ministration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of an influenza ( “ flu ” ) vaccine that was adm inistered to her on October 24, 2019 . Petition at 1

. T he case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On February 25, 2022

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that P etitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at

1. Specifically, R espondent agrees that “ petitioner ’ s claim meets the Table criteria for

SIRVA

. ” Id. at 5 . Respondent further agrees that “ the case was timely filed, that the

1 Because this unpublished R uling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the R uling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that
the identified material fits within this definition, I wil l redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ).2

vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement ”

. Id. Respondent also notes that “ no civil action or proceedings have

be en pursued in conne ction with t he vaccine

- related injury. ” Id

.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #20703 and #20704; SOUTH CAROLINA Disaster Number SC-20012]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 5.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4829-DR), dated September 29, 2024.

# DATES:

Issued on October 6, 2024.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         November 29, 2024.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         June 30, 2025.                    

# ADDRESSES:

*Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov*                         to apply for a disaster assistance loan.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of South Carolina, dated September 29, 2024, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Incident:*                     Hurricane Helene.                

*Incident Period:*                     September 25, 2024 and continuing.                

*Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*                     Jasper, York, and the Catawba Indian Nation.                

*Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):*

South Carolina: Lancaster.

North Carolina: Gaston, Mecklenburg.

Georgia: Chatham.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Rafaela Monchek,

Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.

[FR Doc. 2024-23578 Filed 10-10-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P