alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 24.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Optimal Robotics Corp. (the "Company"),
does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned's knowledge:

      1)    the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
            31, 2002 (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.


Dated:   March 27, 2003                     /s/ Gary S. Wechsler
                                            --------------------
                                                 Gary S. Wechsler
                                                 Treasurer and
                                                 Chief Financial Officer










                                       98
Prepared by MerrillDirect





EXHIBIT 10.2


SUMMARY
OF TRANSACTION BONUS AGREEMENTS


Following is a summary of the transaction bonuses
which are payable to the five executives named in the Company’s most recent
Proxy Statement (“Named Executives”) upon the completion of certain described
transactions:


          Transaction
bonuses will be paid to qualifying Named Executives if the Company completes
the sale of any of its business units (DSS, Color Technologies or DS&IM) or
if the entire Company is sold by means of a business combination or a sale of
all or substantially all of the Company’s assets pursuant to a definitive
agreement entered into prior to December 31, 2002.


          The
transaction bonuses would qualify Named Executives to receive from 0% to 100%
of their maximum transaction bonus amount, depending on the business unit or
combination of business units sold in a given transaction or combination of
transactions.


          The
maximum transaction bonus amount for Mr. Monahan is 60% of his base salary as
of January 1, 2001.  For each of the
other Named Executives, the maximum transaction bonus amount is defined as 40%
of their base salary as of January 1, 2001. 
No Named Executive is eligible to receive, in the aggregate, more than
100% of the maximum transaction bonus amount for which they are eligible.
-SEGRBer-1818

PRIORITY

COR

5. C rebodies after cold soak and ultrasonic acceptance

tests rgo an additional severe environmental exposure

Bade

ControlIPP

oe°

-SECRET-- /24-c.e4i.x:i.ezzz

• •••• ••• ••• r TT.•••••••-••"‘•••• - ••.• • • :•• • •• ••• •-••••• •••••,•-•:•r•n ••nn••••ft-•-•••••-......r•wrn-•••..-

• .1 • • ',:.'•, 3•41c•'

: . • f* •

463-6

lease pass to Dr. McMillan

. No "out of spec" components were assigned to Mission 1017.

A shelf life survey of MK 5A components was authorized by CIA's

r on or about 20 July 1961. The results of this survey were

d at an SE/TD meeting on 20 March 1962. The survey indicated

that a 36-month shelf life for'the forebodies was considered conservative.

3. oad for Mission "bought off" by

USA FD resentative ng in behalf of rest

officer

No disciplinary action taken or contemplated or appropriate. Following

actions being taken which include but are not limited to:

Detailed shelf life limitation determination presently under

review. •

Forebody age test program is in progress. c* rep will be assigned Deirs advisorDellir

cer.

d. Buy off at

go

Delaywill be accomplished by wi

dent Vel

officer ...

4. "Shelf Life" was not defined in the development document. A

"storage life" requirement was imposed stating that "operational performsnce requirements... shall be attainable when removed from storage

any period up to one year. " No qualification program was

autnorized.
in ee . The combination of these successive environment1111Pber s appears to be an adequate sc as for

marginal forebodies. The preliminary results lysis of

forebody • . • currently approved testi were summariaed'

e to comply with the broad programming

three roviding acceptable flight qualified payload 11.1ponents

y • n. Assisted by its payload contractors.

be prepared to present on 1 March a status report on all

which have shelf life limitations. The basis upon

which these limitation's are being imposed. and such actions as deemed

necessary to insure adequate flight and spares components.

—sEeRser---

BT

NMI% AID

Control System

vw

• •
IC 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 139 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 20, 2015 

Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

AN ACT 

To permanently allow an exclusion under the Supplemental 

Security Income program and the Medicaid program for 

compensation provided to individuals who participate in 

clinical trials for rare diseases or conditions. 

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

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

S 139 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring Access to 

3 Clinical Trials Act of 2015’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF SUNSET PROVISION. 

5 Effective as if included in the enactment of the Im6 proving Access to Clinical Trials Act of 2009 (Public Law 

7 111–255, 124 Stat. 2640), section 3 of that Act is amend8 ed by striking subsection (e). 

Passed the Senate July 16, 2015. 

Attest: JULIE E. ADAMS, 

Secretary. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1399 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend and 

increase expensing limitations, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 20, 2015 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently 

extend and increase expensing limitations, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Small Business Ex5 pensing Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXPENSING CERTAIN DEPRECIABLE BUSINESS AS7 SETS FOR SMALL BUSINESS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.— 

9 (1) DOLLAR LIMITATION.—Section 179(b)(1) of 

10 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1399 IS

1 striking ‘‘shall not exceed—’’ and all that follows 

2 and inserting ‘‘shall not exceed $1,000,000.’’. 

3 (2) REDUCTION IN LIMITATION.—Section 

4 179(b)(2) of such Code is amended by striking ‘‘ex5 ceeds—’’ and all that follows and inserting ‘‘exceeds 

6 $2,500,000.’’. 

7 (b) COMPUTER SOFTWARE.—Section 

8 179(d)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

9 amended by striking ‘‘, to which section 167 applies, and 

10 which is placed in service in a taxable year beginning after 

11 2002 and before 2015’’ and inserting ‘‘and to which sec12 tion 167 applies’’. 

13 (c) ELECTION.—Section 179(c)(2) of the Internal 

14 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

15 (1) by striking ‘‘may not be revoked’’ and all 

16 that follows through ‘‘and before 2015’’; and 

17 (2) by striking ‘‘IRREVOCABLE’’ in the heading 

18 thereof. 

19 (d) QUALIFIED REAL PROPERTY.—Section 179(f) of 

20 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

21 (1) by striking ‘‘beginning after 2009 and be22 fore 2015’’ in paragraph (1); and 

23 (2) by striking paragraphs (3) and (4). 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1399 IS

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

2 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

3 December 31, 2014. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: HERITAGE OPERATING, L.P. 

A/K/A DENMAN PROPANE

§

§

§

§

§

§

08-13-00061-CV

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN

MANDAMUS 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus 

against the Honorable Luis Aguilar, Judge of the 243rd District Court of El Paso County, Texas, 

and concludes Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus should be conditionally granted. We 

therefore direct the trial court to vacate its order granting motion for new trial dated January 22, 

2013, in accordance with the opinion of this Court. The writ of mandamus will issue should the 

trial court fail to comply.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2015.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

Rivera, J. (Not Participating)
<PAGE>   1





                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.8

                              CLARK-SCHWEBEL, INC.

                            1997 EXECUTIVE BONUS POOL


Attached is the 1997 Bonus Plan as submitted by management and recommended by
the Compensation and Benefit Committee.

1.       The plan is based on EBITDA. From $0 - $27.0M EBITDA, the pool is $0K,
         or Board discretion. A table is attached that reflects the % of bonus
         pool earned at various levels of EBITDA up to $50M or 125% of pool.

2.       A secondary pool of 10% would be set aside to reward management members
         outside the incentive plan. (In the past, these awards have been
         recommended by the responsible Vice President, based on individual
         special performance.)

3.       The plan participant pool would be split between earned @ 70% and
         discretionary @ 30%. Payout of the discretionary portion would be
         determined by the appropriate Vice President and President, based on
         individual goals and performance against those goals.

4.       There will be five levels of participation ranging from 40% to 120% of
         annual base salary based on level of responsibility.

5.       The bonus allocation pool will be calculated by multiplying the base
         pay (W-2 base pay) of each individual by their level of participation.
         The earned bonus of 70% is then allocated to participants based on the
         allocation pool while the 30% discretionary portion is based on
         individual's performance as determined by their respective manager.














<PAGE>   2






                              CLARK-SCHWEBEL, INC.

                               BONUS POOL SCHEDULE

                                EARNING THE POOL


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          %                        EARNED
        EBITDA                          POOL                        POOL
        ------                          ----                        ----
<S>                         <C>                          <C> 
      0 - 26.9              Board Discretion             Bonus Discretion
          27.0                            25                        465.0
          33.0                            50                        930.8
          38.0                            75                       1395.0
          44.0                           100                       1860.0
          50.0                           125                       2325.0
</TABLE>




PARTICIPATION LEVELS AS A % OF BASE SALARY

PLAN LEVEL        I.             120%
                 II.             100%
                III.              80%
                 IV.              60%
                  V.              40%
MICHAEL LAWRENCE 

CASSIDY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-868

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 5, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

Michael Flowers, Judge.

Michael Lawrence Cassidy, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kathryn Lane, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We previously affirmed Appellant’s judgment and sentence on his direct 

appeal. Cassidy v. State, 130 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (table). We now 

affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1245 (Fla. 2004) (“The remedy of habeas corpus 
2

is not available in Florida to obtain the kind of collateral postconviction relief 

available in the sentencing court pursuant to rule 3.850.”). This affirmance is 

without prejudice to Appellant’s seeking relief pursuant to Florida Rule of 

Criminal Procedure 3.850 on his claims regarding count 3 of his judgment and 

sentence. See Thomas v. State, 935 So. 2d 91, 91 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). 

We do not pass upon the viability or merits of Appellant’s claims, which is 

for the trial court’s determination if the claims are properly presented. Any motion 

filed under Rule 3.850 must comply with the content and certification requirements 

of the rule. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b), (b)(1), (c), (h), (n). In most circumstances, it 

must be filed within two years after issuance of mandate. Breland v. State, 58 So. 

3d 326, 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (two-year time limit under Rule 3.850 

commences upon appellate court’s issuance of mandate). In Appellant’s direct 

appeal, mandate issued on February 7, 2014; therefore, the two years within which 

to file a motion under Rule 3.850 will expire on February 7, 2016. Court records 

indicate that Appellant filed an amended motion under Rule 3.850 after filing the 

present habeas petition, the contents of which are not before this Court. If not

already asserted in the recent amended motions under Rule 3.850, Appellant may 

assert his claims regarding count 3 in a timely and facially sufficient motion that 

complies with Rule 3.850. 

WOLF and KELSEY, JJ., concur; THOMAS, J., concurs in result only.
Date:

 Time:

 Location:

 

Next Generation Aerial Services

UAV Pilot pre-flight checklist:

Physical inspection of UAV:

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Physical inspection of Remote Control: 

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Proper personnel on-site:

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Proper notifications and permissions received, Property owner/manager, FAA, 

COA,_________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Weather conditions: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Safe distance perimeter set:______________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Flight 

notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-10-0000104

30-SEP-2013

10:00 AM
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-41479 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JUAN MANUEL CARDENAS-JASSO, also known as Juan Antonio Longoria-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-02-CR-328-1

-------------------- Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Manuel Cardenas-Jasso has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Cardenas has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from furtherNo. 02-41479 -2- responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1130/2006

of 24 July 2006         

determining the extent to which the applications for import licences submitted in July 2006 for certain dairy products under certain tariff quotas opened by Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 of 14 December 2001 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards the import arrangements for milk and milk products and opening tariff quotas (2), and in particular Article 16(2) thereof,

Whereas:

Applications lodged from 1 to 10 July 2006 for certain quotas referred to in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 concern quantities greater than those available; therefore, the allocation factors should be fixed for the quantities applied for,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The allocation coefficients set out in the Annex to this Regulation shall be applied to the quantities for which import licences have been sought for the period from 1 to 10 July 2006 in respect of products falling within the quotas referred to in parts I.A, I.B, points 1 and 2, and parts I.C, I.D, I.E, I.F, I.G and I.H, of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 July 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 July 2006.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

(2)OJ L 341, 22.12.2001, p. 29. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 926/2006 (OJ L 170, 23.6.2006, p. 8).

----

ANNEX I.A

----

ANNEX I.B

1.   Products originating in Roumania

2.   Products originating in Bulgaria

----

ANNEX I.C

Products originating in ACP countries

----

ANNEX I.D

Products originating in Turkey

----

ANNEX I.Ε

Products originating from South Africa

----

ANNEX I.F

Products originating from Switzerland

----

ANNEX I.H

Products originating in Norway

----
PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# DNRO provides keynote address at Space Symposium

By Staff

                COLORADO SPRINGS, Co.  –              
Today DNRO Dr. Scolese gave a keynote address at the 38th annual Space Symposium. In his speech, Scolese stated that “the future is now,” highlighting innovation, streamlined acquisition approaches, partnerships, and advancement of new and enhanced capabilities for the nation’s overhead ISR architecture.

“At the NRO, we’re advancing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance beyond what was thought possible,” he said to an audience of approximately 10,000 space professionals and decision makers at the unclassified portion of the event. “We’re putting new capabilities on orbit, on the ground, and everywhere in between.”

**Click here**, to read the remarks Dr. Scolese delivered at the conference where he discussed the NRO’s intent to quadruple the number of satellites currently on orbit, deliver ten times the amount of signals, and future engage with commercial providers.

While at the symposium, Scolese also participated in a classified fireside chat with Audrey Schaffer, director of space policy at the National Security Council, and NGA Deputy Director Tonya Wilkerson. The discussion was moderated by retired USAF Gen. John Hyten, former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Dr. Scolese is also joining Gen. James Dickinson of U.S. Space Command in a press conference to talk about NRO’s work.

“What was a vision ofr our agency just a few years ago is in view,” Scolese said. “The future is now. I am confident that the NRO, our people, and our partners are all committed not just to keep pace, but to accelerate our advantage in space. The safety and security of the world—and our nation—are counting on it.”

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

SpaceSymposiumnews articles
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW OF THORATEC
LABORATORIES CORPORATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
QUARTERLY REPORTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITY AND EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JULY 3, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       2,078,431
<SECURITIES>                                 2,093,480
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,923,520
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  6,533,418
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,812,079
<PP&E>                                      11,646,355
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,112,371)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,364,359
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,065,278
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    72,855,926
<OTHER-SE>                                (51,553,521)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,364,359
<SALES>                                     10,267,151
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,639,379
<CGS>                                        4,008,764
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,008,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,019,127
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (388,512)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (388,512)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (388,512)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)


</TABLE>