alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 60118 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. DONALD LEE HATHORN , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:09

- CR

- 25

- 1

Before JONES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Donald Lee Hathorn, federal prisoner # 10194

- 043, pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute and was sentenced to 106 months of imprisonment. Hath orn moved for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) based on the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. The distr ict court granted the motion and reduced his sentence to 89 months

. After an untimely appeal, Hathorn moved the district court to

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 10 , 2014

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-60118 Document: 00512506293 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/21/2014No. 13

- 60118

correct a clerical error under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36

. Hathorn asserted that the amended presentence report incorrectly calculated his new guidelines range and that the district court failed to take the correct range into account in red ucing his sentence under § 3582. The district court denied the motion as being without merit and untimely. The district court denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal and certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith. Rule 36 provides that the district court “ may at any time correct a clerical error in a judgment, order, or other part of the record, or correct an error in the record arising from oversight or omission .” F ED

. R. C RIM

. P . 36

. A clerical error occurs when the cou rt intends to do one thing, but through clerical mistake or oversight does another. United States v. Buendia

- Rangel , 553 F.3d 378, 379 ( 5th Cir. 2008) . The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hathorn ’s Rule 36 motion. Se e United State s v. Mueller , 168 F.3d 186, 188 (5th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we deny Hathorn’s motion for leave to appeal IFP, and we dismiss the appeal as frivolous. Ba ugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997); Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) ; 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2

. MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

2 Case: 13-60118 Document: 00512506293 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/21/2014
# C_2015310EN.01000301.xml

| 19.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

18 September 2015

(2015/C 310/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1419 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,31 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4612 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,72980 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3248 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0913 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,2370 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,071 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 309,81 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2030 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4187 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,4253 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5709 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4876 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8498 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7703 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5886 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 329,00 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,0962 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,2674 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6305 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 399,84 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8053 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,878 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 75,1599 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,596 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4370 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,7957 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 74,9929 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1419

JPY

Japanese yen

136,31

DKK

Danish krone

7,4612

GBP

Pound sterling

0,72980

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3248

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0913

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,2370

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,071

HUF

Hungarian forint

309,81

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2030

RON

Romanian leu

4,4187

TRY

Turkish lira

3,4253

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5709

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4876

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8498

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7703

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5886

KRW

South Korean won

1 329,00

ZAR

South African rand

15,0962

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,2674

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6305

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 399,84

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8053

PHP

Philippine peso

52,878

RUB

Russian rouble

75,1599

THB

Thai baht

40,596

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4370

MXN

Mexican peso

18,7957

INR

Indian rupee

74,9929

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2014136EN.01000101.xml

| 6.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 136/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 136/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7206 — Bain Capital/Anchorage Capital/Ideal Standard)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 136/01

On 28 April 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7206. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7206. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6344
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. RANDALL LEE CONRAD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (1:04-cr-00297-NCT-1; 1:07-cv-00313-NCT-WWD) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 30, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randall Lee Conrad, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Randall Lee Conrad seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Conrad has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 13, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, December 13, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18I0073. KANDALLU R. RAMESH et al. v. ROBERT D. MOORE, AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF CHRISTOPHER G. MOORE et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: S10V0458
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 15229)    
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential 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:*                         National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; Biomarker.                    

*Date:*                         April 16, 2015.                    

*Time:*                         10 a.m. to 2 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health; Neuroscience Center; 6001 Executive Boulevard; Rockville, MD 20852; (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Joel A. Saydoff, Ph.D.; Scientific Review Officer; Scientific Review Branch; Division of Extramural Research; NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center; 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 3205, MSC 9529; Bethesda, MD 20892-9529; 301-496-9223;                         *joel.saydoff@nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

 Dated: March 17, 2015.

Carolyn Baum,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2015-06475 Filed 3-20-15; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
acer-ex101_6.htm



Exhibit 10.1

WAIVER AND AGREEMENT

This WAIVER AND AGREEMENT dated as of October 6, 2021 is made between ACER THERAPEUTICS INC., a Delaware corporation (“Acer”), and RELIEF THERAPEUTICS HOLDING AG, a company organized and existing under the laws of Switzerland (“Relief”), with respect to that certain Collaboration and License Agreement, dated March 19, 2021, between the Parties (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meaning assigned to them in the Agreement.

RECITALS:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5.2(d) of the Agreement, Relief is obligated to pay Acer Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000) within fifteen (15) Business Days after the NDA for the Acer Product for a UCD has been accepted for review by the FDA (the “Second Development Payment”).

WHEREAS, Relief has requested and Acer has agreed to waive the original payment terms and amend the timing for payment of a portion of the Second Development Payment to tranche the amount in two payments.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual agreements herein, the Parties agree as follows:


	
 
	
1.
	
Upon the FDA accepting for review the NDA for the Acer Product for a UCD, the Second Development Payment will be payable by Relief to Acer as follows:





	
 
	
a.
	
Relief will pay Acer Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) within fifteen (15) Business Days; and





	
 
	
b.
	
Relief will pay Acer Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) on or before January 14, 2022; provided, however, if requested by Acer in its sole and absolute discretion, Relief will pay Acer the remaining Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) upon fifteen (15) Business Days’ written notice from Acer to Relief. 





	
 
	
2.
	
Except as stated herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.





	
 
	
3.
	
Governing Law. This Waiver and Agreement and all disputes arising out of or related hereto or any breach hereof will be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of New York, U.S., without giving effect to any choice of law principles that would require the application of the laws of a different jurisdiction and excluding the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sales of Goods.





	
 
	
4.
	
Counterparts. This Waiver and Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. Facsimile and other electronically scanned signatures shall have the same effect as their originals.




 



 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Waiver and Agreement as of the date first written above.

 

 

 


	
ACER THERAPEUTICS INC.
	
 
	
RELIEF THERAPEUTICS HOLDING AG

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
/s/ Chris Schelling
	
 
	
By:
	
/s/ Jeremy Meinen

	
Printed Name:
	
Chris Schelling
	
 
	
Printed name:
	
Jeremy Meinen

	
Title:
	
CEO / Founder
	
 
	
Title:
	
VP Finance




 

2
# CA2015057EN.01000101.xml

| 17.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 57/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 57/1

---

Corrigendum to notice of open competition EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 — Secretaries/Clerks (SC 1 and SC 2) in the following fields: 1. Administrative support, 2. Financial support, 3. Secretarial support

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 3 A of 8 January 2015
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 3 A of 8 January 2015

(2015/C 057 A/01)

Page 2, Section I, point 3:

| instead of: | ‘Deadline (including validation): 10 February 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’, |
| --- | --- |

instead of:

instead of:

‘Deadline (including validation): 10 February 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’,

10 February 2015

| read: | ‘Deadline (including validation): 17 February 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’. |
| --- | --- |

read:

read:

‘Deadline (including validation): 17 February 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’.

17 February 2015

---
Production (MT) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

CFCs 43 37.5 30.2 19.2 11.2

Carbon Tetrachloride 6.7 8.9 7.3 3.3 4.1 6.4 3.2 6.7

Methyl Chloroform 3.81

HBFCs 0.01

Total 43 48.02 39.1 26.5 3.3 15.3 6.4 3.2 6.7

Consumption (MT)

CFCs 43 37.5 30.2 19.2 11.2

Carbon Tetrachloride 6.7 8.9 7.3 3.3 4.1 6.4 3.2 5.4

Methyl Chloroform 4.11

HBFCs 0.01

Total 43 48.32 39.1 26.5 3.3 15.3 6.4 3.2 5.4

Source: http://ozone.unep.org/en/ods_data_access_centre/ 

Production and consumption of ODS for the Laboratory Use Exemption in the United States
# C_2015276EN.01000101.xml

| 21.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 276/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 276/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7672 — Volkswagen Financial Services/Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria/Volkswagen Credit Compania Financiera)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 276/01)

On 12 August 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7672. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7672. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
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 Annual Report of RoomLinX, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10−KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael S. Wasik,
      Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as
      adopted  ursuant to Section 906 of the SARBANES−OXLEY Act of 2002,
      that:





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 consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operation
      of
      the Company.





Date:
            
            January
                31,
                2008By:
            
            /s/
                Michael S.
                WasikMichael
                S. WasikChief
                Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
November 9, 2016

Mr. Gary W. Santos

Training Center Manager

SimCom International Inc. dba SimCom Aviation Training Phoenix

7860 East McClain, Suite 1

Scottsdale, AZ 85260

Dear Mr. Santos :

This is in response to your September 30, 2016

, letter sent to the public docke t ( No. FAA

20 10

- 1227 ) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of SimCom

International Inc. dba SimCom Aviation Training Phoenix ( SimCom ) , air agency certificate

number Q8PX038K, to extend Exemption No. 10209, as amended. That exemp tion provided

relief from § § 91.9(a) and 91.531(a)(1) and (2) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

( 14 CFR) . That exemption, if granted, would allow SimCom and operators of Cessna CE

500, 550, 552, and 560 model airplanes to operate those models witho ut a second

- in

command (SIC) pilot, provided those operators received training and testing from SimCom.

Exemption No. 10209, as amended, expired on February 28, 2015 . However, the FAA issued

an exemption from §§ 91.9(a) and 91.531(a)(1) and (2) to SimCom on May 5, 2015. This

exemption, Exemption No. 11474 (copy enclosed) provide s the same relief that Exemption

No. 10209, as amended , provided SimCom. The expiration date of Exemption No. 11474 is

May 31, 2017.

Based on the existence of Exemption No. 11 474, the FAA has determined that there is no

reason to process your request seeking an extension of Exemption No. 10209, as amended,

and will take no further action on your petition.2

If you wish to petition the FAA for an extension of Exemption No. 1147 4, § 11 .63(d)

prescribes

, in pertinent part, that you should submit a petition for exemption 120 days before

the exemption is needed to take effect . In your case, you will want to petition to extend

Exemption No. 11474 during the month of February, 2017.

Sincerely,

/s/

James M. Crotty

Manager, Air craft and Air port Rules Division

Enclosure

Exemption No. 11474