alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT TO ASSET SALE AGREEMENT

     This first  amendment to the January 18, 1999 Asset Sale Agreement  between
Powersoft  Technologies,  Inc., Vendor, and SAR Trading Limited,  Purchaser,  is
made and entered into this 18th day of June, 1999 by and between:

         POWERSOFT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
         1088-650 West Georgia Street
         PO Box 11586
         Vancouver, B.C.
         Canada  V6B 4N8

         (hereinafter "Vendor")

         AND

         SAR TRADING LIMITED
         Tropic Isle Building
         P.O. Box 438
         Road Town, Tortola
         British Virgin Islands

         (hereinafter "Purchaser")

                                    RECITALS

A.   The original  January 18, 1999 agreement  (Original  Agreement) is attached
     hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by reference.

B.   Vendor and Purchaser desire to amend the Original Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

     1.   The Vendor shall, and does hereby,  sell 100% of its VHKP, HFCA, HFCI,
          HFCIA,  HFM, WCC and GHK shares to the Purchaser.  In consideration of
          the Purchaser's  assumption of liabilities totaling U.S. $3,472,722.00
          from the Vendor subsidiaries, namely VHKP, HFCA, HFCI, HFCIA, HFM, WCC
          and GHK, the Vendor  hereby  agrees to issue two notes  payable to the
          Purchaser for a total of U.S. $3,472,722.00.

     2.   Note I shall be for U.S.$1,000,000.00,  to be converted into shares at
          $0.05 (five cents) per share immediately upon receipt.

<PAGE>


     3.   Note II  shall  be for  U.S.  $2,472,722.00.  This  amount  represents
          $3,838,000.00  payable by Vendor to Purchaser,  (as agreed upon in the
          original   Asset  Sale  Agreement   dated  January  18,  1999),   less
          $1,365,278.00,  which has since become  payable by Purchaser to Vendor
          as the result of an assignment agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B.

     4.   Note II shall be non-interest  bearing and can be convertible into the
          Vendor share at fifteen  trading  days average  price at the option of
          the  Vendor by giving  seven  trading  days  notice in  writing to the
          Purchaser.  The Note can be converted at a minimum of $250,000.00  per
          conversion.

     5.   The Vendor warrants to the Purchaser that, at the time of closing, the
          liability will not exceed U.S.$3,472,722.00.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF the Parties  hereto execute this  amendment,  which shall be
effective as of the 18th day of June, 1999.


POWERSOFT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

/s/ Robert H. Trapp
-------------------------------------
Robert H. Trapp, Director
POWERSOFT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


SAR TRADING LIMITED

/s/ Fai H. Chan
-------------------------------------
Fai H. Chan, Director
SAR TRADING LIMITED






                                       2
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-13-0152

SAT Date: 12/28/2012

Print Date: 6/4/2013

Related cases:

Health related cases: 

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 1-2 2

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

3 1 1 PMN

Exposure Based Review:

Health:

Ecotox: No

Routes of exposure: Health: Dermal Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

Keywords:

 Keywords: MUTA; AQUATOX

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-13-0152

FATE: 

 with MP = Sublimes at 340-388C at 50 torr (M)

log Kow = (E); 

VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E)

BP > 400 C (E)

H < 1.00E-8 (E)

POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg ≥ mo
Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong

PBT Potential: P3B1

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is nil all routes as the neat material, poor all 

routes if in solution (pchem). Concern for mutagenicity based on submitted test data.

 Test Data: (+) Salmonella strain TA100 with activation, only two 

strains tested

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.71

daphnid 48-h LC50 0.54

green algal 96-h EC50 1.4

fish _ chronic value 0.098

daphnid _ chronic 

value

0.12

algal _ chronic 

value

0.698

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for 

SAR class = MW 668; S < 1 mg/L at 20 C (P); pH7; with unknown mp 

(P); effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal concentrations; 

hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

10

SARs

SAR Class

Ecotox Category 

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
```

[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 4 (Friday, January 9, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H158]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                         SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED

  By unanimous consent, permission to address the House, following the 
legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was 
granted to:
  (The following Members (at the request of Ms. Woolsey) to revise and 
extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
  Ms. Woolsey, for 5 minutes, today.
  Mr. DeFazio, for 5 minutes, today.
  Ms. Kaptur, for 5 minutes, today.
  Mr. Doggett, for 5 minutes, today.
  Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida, for 5 minutes, today.
  Mr. Kucinich, for 5 minutes, today.
  (The following Members (at the request of Mr. Price of Georgia) to 
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
  Mr. Neugebauer, for 5 minutes, today.
  Mr. Price of Georgia, for 5 minutes, today.

                          ____________________
```
Appalachian Region

Interior Regions 1 & 2

Appalachian Region

Regional Director’s 

Office

Technical 

Support Division

Geospatial 

Services Branch

Engineering 

Support Branch

Physical and 

Biological 

Services Branch

Program 

Assistance 

Division 

Grants 

Management 

Branch

State and Federal 

Programs Branch

Applicant Violator 

System & Data 

Analysis Branch

Lexington Field 

Office

Field Oversight 

Branch

Field Branch 

AML

Program Support 

Branch

Pittsburgh Field 

Office

Field Oversight 

Branch

Field Branch 

AML

Program Support 

Branch

Charleston Field 

Office

Field Oversight 

Branch

Field Branch 

AML

Program Support 

Branch
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.2

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I, Ernst Luebke, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of Mymetics 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(s) 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:

     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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):

     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date: July 17, 2007                     By: /s/ Ernst Luebke
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            Principal financial and chief
                                            accounting officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 221 (Friday, November 15, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 90338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-26592]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 15, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 7, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 667 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-325, K2025-323.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-26592 Filed 11-14-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
NO. 07-10-0185-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO
PANEL B FEBRUARY 18, 2011

__________________ ____________ OMAR GUERRERO A.K.A. JUAN GUERRERO A.K.A. SALVADOR GUERRERO, Appellant

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________ _____________ FROM THE 108th DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY; NO. 59,732-E; HON. DOUGL AS R. WOODBURN, PRESIDING

__________________ _____________ On Motion to Dismiss

__________________ _____________ Before QUINN, C.J., a nd CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant Omar Guerrero, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal, signed by appellant, because he no longer desires to prosecute it. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant = s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Do not publish. Per Curiam
1

NUMBER 13-11-00063-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE CYPRESS TEXAS LLOYDS

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1

Relator, Cypress Texas Lloyds, filed a petition for writ of mandamus on January 

31, 2011, seeking to compel the trial court to withdraw its order denying relator’s motion 

to abate the underlying lawsuit. On February 2, 2011, this Court requested that the real 

parties in interest, Guadalupe Salazar and Claudia Salazar, file a response to the 

petition for writ of mandamus. The parties to this proceeding have now filed a “Joint 

 

1

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required 

to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). 
2

Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Mandamus” on grounds that this original 

proceeding has been rendered moot. 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the joint motion to dismiss, is of 

the opinion that the parties have shown themselves entitled to the relief sought. 

Accordingly, the joint motion to dismiss is GRANTED and this original proceeding is 

DISMISSED without reference to the merits thereof. 

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 18th day of February, 2011.
Exhibit 10.3


 


 


 


GENERAL SALES AGREEMENT


 


Date: January 1, 2020


Supplier: KUBE Development Ltd 


Direct Client: 东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility) 


 


On January 1, 2020, KUBE Development Ltd.
hereby acknowledges “东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility)” as Direct Client in the city of Dongguan and Guangzhou, China. KUBE Development Ltd. will sell goods directly
to “东莞市正好实业投资有限公司 (Agility)”,
and will not interfere with the affairs between “东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility)” and her China client, unless KUBE Development Ltd. was explicitly invited to do so by “东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility)”. 


 


This agreement will have a 24 month (two year)
period.


 


		●	Start date: January 1, 2020



 


		●	End Date: December 31, 2021



 


This agreement does not include any existing
KUBE Development Ltd. clients that have been receiving goods or services from KUBE Development Ltd. prior to this date, located
in the regions mentioned above. To eliminate confusion, any new account from “东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility)” is subject to review and approval from KUBE Development Ltd.


 


On Behalf of KUBE Development Ltd.


 


	/s/ Winson H Wong	 	/s/ Kirin Tso, COO
	Mr. Winson H Wong, CEO	 	Mr. Kirin Tso, COO


 


On Behalf of 东莞市正好实业投资有限公司
(Agility)


 


Room 1502, 15/F Beverly House, 93~107 Lockhart
Road, Wan Chai, Hong Kong

TEL +852 5462 8398/ +86 147 1493 9077
# Official Journal L 168/30 J

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 168 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6030 June 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 168

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6030 June 2017

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on cross-border portability of online content services in the internal market (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market, and repealing Directive 2003/71/EC (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on cross-border portability of online content services in the internal market (
  1
  )

1

1

*

Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market, and repealing Directive 2003/71/EC (
  1
  )

1

12

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Gardella, Appellant.

[774 NYS2d 740]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Copertino, J.), rendered June 18, 2001, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s conviction stems from his violent assault upon his former girlfriend. When he could not persuade her to resume their relationship, he stabbed her 17 times on a Suffolk County street, and stated “if I can’t have you, no one can have you.” The complainant survived the attack. The defendant, a diabetic, conceded that he stabbed the complainant, but testified, supported by expert testimony, that he was suffering from a hypoglycemic episode at the time, and was unable to form the requisite criminal intent.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the evidence adduced at the trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), was legally sufficient to establish his guilt of attempted murder in the second *696degree and assault in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt *(see People v Jones,*309 AD2d 819 [2003], *lv denied*1 NY3d 574 [2003]; *People v Jamison,*301 AD2d 539 [2003]). The People offered expert testimony to rebut the defense expert that the defendant did not suffer from a mental disease or defect of sufficient severity which would interfere with his ability to form the intent to stab the complainant. The conflicting expert testimony created a credibility issue for the jury’s determination *(see People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). Its determination is clearly supported by the record *(see People v Mallen,*247 AD2d 556 [1998]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Adams, JJ., concur.
S. 893

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,

the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

An Act

To amend title 46, United States Code, to provide equitable treatment with respect

to State and local income taxes for certain individuals who perform duties on

vessels.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 111 OF TITLE 46, UNITED

STATES CODE.

Section 11108 of title 46, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘(a) WITHHOLDING.—’’ before ‘‘WAGES’’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(b) LIABILITY.—

‘‘(1) LIMITATION ON JURISDICTION TO TAX.—An individual

to whom this subsection applies is not subject to the income

tax laws of a State or political subdivision of a State, other

than the State and political subdivision in which the individual

resides, with respect to compensation for the performance of

duties described in paragraph (2).

‘‘(2) APPLICATION.—This subsection applies to an

individual—

‘‘(A) engaged on a vessel to perform assigned duties

in more than one State as a pilot licensed under section

7101 of this title or licensed or authorized under the laws

of a State; or
S. 893—2

‘‘(B) who performs regularly-assigned duties while

engaged as a master, officer, or crewman on a vessel operating on the navigable waters of more than one State.’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

Commission Monthly Case Activity for July 2023

1. Cases Pending Beginning of Month 17

2. Cases Added to Docket 0 

3. Cases Subtracted from Docket 0 

 

 

4. Total Cases Pending End of Month 17
316B RULE

TELEPHONE LOG

Name of Caller: John Sunda, SAIC

Date: February 26, 2010

Company Name: SPX Cooling Technologies, Inc.

Street Address: 7401 W 129 Street

City/State/ZIP: Overland Park, KS 66213

Person Contacted: Kent A. Martens, P. E.

Title: Chief Technical Advisor - Evaporative Cooling

Contact Info: Tel: 913/664-7501

Fax: 913/693-9522

Cell: 913/302-7234

kent.martens@spx.com

Questions: Called to inquire about treated flu gas disposal through natural draft cooling 

towers, their project to do this at the Cardinal Power Plant, and about natural draft tower 

cost and prevalence

The AEP Cardinal power plant $47 million project includes demolishing the fill ring and 

replacing nearly the entire unit 3 cooling tower internal components. The plant would 

have had to do this anyway to extend the life of the tower so it wasn’t necessary to 

accommodate the flue gas disposal system. They do need to provide engineering 

solutions to deal with the hole through which the flue gas passes. A detailed engineering 

analysis is performed and the solution will be dependent on tower design its condition 

and various loads – he mentioned that the towers are subject to substantial wind loads. 

One solution is to install a steel ring around the tower near when the breach is. I 

confirmed that the system was only for unit 3 (the press release is vague about this. The 

company that recently put in new stacks for unit 1&2 as part of those units FGD retrofit 

at the plant was well into engineering design for unit 3 as well when AEP decided to go 

with the SPX solution using the natural draft towers instead. AEP had already last year 

during a shut down lined the inside and outside near the top of cooling tower with a 

corrosion resistant coating in anticipation of the project and so this component was not 

part of the $47 million. Distance to the existing (or new) tower is an important 

consideration. He also noted that Germany requires that treated flue gas be discharged 

through the natural draft cooling tower.

I asked about a comparison of long term costs for natural draft towers versus mechanical 

draft towers and he said natural draft towers need an expected life of about 40 years and 
be a base load operation like a large coal plant. I asked if he had a feel about expectations 

of the future use of natural draft towers and he mentioned that few of the 17 coal plants 

being proposed were considering natural draft towers but that a recent coal plant project 

now cancelled or on hold was not considering natural draft towers until the option and 

savings such as stack costs for flue gas was introduced .

We discussed the issues regarding aesthetics and the nuclear stigma for natural draft 

towers and I noted the trend in US businesses for short economic horizons, he agreed that 

the public acceptance issues are a problem but that new large coal plants do use long time 

horizons of 40+ years when evaluating plant economics.
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
Commission Monthly Case Activity for August 2018

1. Cases Pending Beginning of Month					24

2. Cases Added to Docket						  1

Manua’s, Inc.
No. 18-1059
Direction for Review on August 10, 2018

3. Cases Subtracted From Docket					 -0



4. Total Cases Pending End of Month					25