alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
knwn_ex101.htm

 
 EXHIBIT 10.1
     
 AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO
 CONVERTIBLE REDEEMABLE PROMISSORY NOTE 
 DATED JANUARY 31, 2018
  
 This AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO CONVERTIBLE REDEEMABLE PROMISSORY NOTE dated JANUARY 31, 2018 in the principal amount of US$664,233 (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of September 27, 2021, by and between J3E2A2Z LP (the “Holder”), and Know Labs, Inc., a Nevada corporation f/k/a Visualant, Incorporated (the “Company”).
  
 WHEREAS, the Company is a party to that certain Convertible Redeemable Promissory Note dated January 31, 2018 (the “Debenture”) payable to Holder (capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Debenture); 
  
 WHEREAS, the Promissory Note currently has a Maturity Date of September 30, 2021; and
  
 WHEREAS, the Holder and the Company wish to amend the Promissory Note to extend the Maturity Date and increase the interest rate;
  
 Now, therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows.
  
 1. Amendment of Maturity Date. The Maturity Date of the Debenture is hereby amended to March 31, 2022.
  
 2. Interest Rate. The interest rate is 6%. 
  
 3. No Other Changes. Except as specifically set forth in this Amendment, the terms of the Debenture remain in full force and effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.
  
 	 Company:
	  

	  
	  
	  

	 KNOW LABS, INC.
	  

	  
	  
	  

	 By:
	 /s/ Phillip A. Bosua
	  

		 Phillip A. Bosua
	  

	 Its: 
	 Chief Executive Officer 
	  

	  
	  
	  

	 Holder:
	  

	  
	  
	  

	  
	 /s/ Ronald P. Erickson
	  

	  
	 Ronald P. Erickson, Manager
	  

	  
	 J3E2A2Z LP
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


    CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF
                CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE


         I, John A. Witham, Chief Financial Officer of Metris Companies Inc.,
certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December
31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Metris Companies Inc.


                                          /s/ John A. Witham
                                          -----------------------------------
                                          John A. Witham
                                          Executive Vice President and Chief
                                          Financial Officer
                                          (Principal Financial Officer)
                                          March 31, 2003
# C_2015111EN.01000101.xml

| 1.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 111/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7521 — Steinhoff International Holdings/Pepkor Holdings)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 111/01)

On 25 March 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 32015M7521. 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 32015M7521. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
\ 

, 

~ ,. --"':""'"' ... 

~~~~-------------........ ._ 

REF ID:A56937 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

lea1or 1Jalt.e4 D19J01 UatlOll i1es .. o.rrsar 

Bnuab Joiat. llnice• M11alm 

Ilda ...,, IDUdS111 

1fuJdllgt;cm 25, De C • 

.,._. l'rec!qa 

x u grat.tul tw Cow •nNr 5 or a.c. • c.a. Ja1111•• 

DS.plamatto leftioD Bl•torr am ill tauldnc ioa tw 1• I feel 

I tllloal4 _. eertaill tbat tbe •terlal ls iDta484 to lMI 

l&eP' lien taz cw leclm1cal Ll'brmT u4111nor1aal Ualt. 

Jt l• is aot to 'be nt-1at, plAee 19' • lmow' u4 I vUl 

- cat. 1t l• 111'89tl1' ret.mmcl. 

a~, 

_,-, I 

I 

I 

,, 

' \ 

~·. 

J

\ . 

' 

l ' ~ ~lf';. .. 'i"'"~ 

,,..,,,,... - ·~"'~· ,. .. ~-;~ 1\ "' ~-'I;...... ~ r I\'°_, ..... I • ~ 11 ... 

_· .. ~ ·- 1'"oP"'SEcReT" 'ULI RA~t;:~·. ' , .": _ 

- _........,___J_~ _ __:,---- --l~-------- -- _.1... ___ : ... - '- -- - .. 

...
_, 

I 

I 

I 

REF ID:A65469 

llAGIC P.AB EAST SUIMARY 

BO. 2:51 

6 Kov 44 

c:- r--=' I 

I ~ I I I I 

~ ' ! f - ... I I 

!· ;:_- .. 

1. Ua• ot D/F b7 the Japanese tor Aircraft Warnins1 

Prom Japanese meaaagea, aerial photographs and . ' 

collateral sources, 1t has been established that the 

.Japanese, bJ using D/I (direction t1nding) stations, bave 

been receiving earl7 warnins.,o~ Allied air attacks before 

the attacking planes vere within radar range. TAB A summarizes 

the available data on this use of' D/P stations. Successful 

' 

use of' D/I tor.aircraft ,warning depends ent1re17 on interception or inter-plane and air-to-ground radio transmissions, 

and can be avoided if' Allied planes •1nta1n radio silence. 

--

14 pursuant to E. 0.
# C_2015305EN.01000102.xml

| 16.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7723 — KKR/Reggeborgh/Deutsche Glasfaser)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 305/02)

On 2 September 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 32015M7723. EUR-Lex is the on-line 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 32015M7723. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
EX-4.1





 Exhibit 4.1 
  






 
 CLASS A COMMON DESERT PEAK MINERALS INC. CUSIP STOCK a Delaware corporation The Corporation is Authorized to
Issue Shares Common Stock – Par Value $0.001 Per Share THIS CERTIFIES THAT SPECIMEN, HOLDER OF fully paid and non-assessable Shares of Class A Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share, of Desert Peak
Minerals Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), transferable only on the books of the Company by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed. This certificate is
not valid unless countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Company has caused this certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this day of Countersigned and registered Christopher
Conoscenti, Chief Executive Officer American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC as Transfer Agent and Registrar Brooklyn, NY By: Carrie Osicka, Chief Financial Officer Authorized Officer 












 



 
 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto Shares represented by the within Certificate, and does hereby irrevocably
constitute and appoint Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the books of the within named Company with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated In the presence of (print name) (print name) Notice: The signature to this assignment must
correspond with the name as written upon the face of the certificate in every particular, without alteration or enlargement, or any change whatever. The Company is authorized to issue more than one class of stock or more than one series of any class
and the Company will furnish without charge to each stockholder who so requests the powers, designations, preferences and relative, participating, optional, or other special rights of each class of stock or series thereof and the qualifications,
limitations or restrictions of such preferences and/or rights.
#### Woodlock vs. Combs.

*May 29*

*June 23, 1880.*

Bill os’ Exceptions. *Presumptions as to rulings and verdict, where evidence not all given.*

Where the bill of exceptions is not shown (by certificate of the judge or stipulation of the parties) to contain all the evidence given on the trial, exceptions to a refusal of a compulsory nonsuit, or to instructions which might have been warranted by the evidence, are of no avail; and the jury will be presumed to have found, upon sufficient evidence, every alleged fact necessary to sustain their general verdict.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *Lincoln*County.

Action to recover a certain sum alleged to be due plaintiff *660from defendant, for service rendered, labor performed, money advanced and indebtedness incurred, by the former for the latter, at his request. At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, defendant moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that such evidence showed a contract, not with defendant as alleged, but with one Sailes as a partner of defendant, who was therefore jointly liable with the latter and a necessary party to the suit; but this motion was denied. Defendant excepted to the order denying such motion, and also to certain portions of the charge. Plaintiff had a verdict; a new trial was refused; and defendant appealed from a judgment on the verdict.

Eor the appellant there was a brief by *O’Neill c& Eldred,*and oral argument by *Mr. Eld/red.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Van JR. 'Willard,*his attorney, with *Silverthorn <& Hurley,*of counsel, and oral argument by *Mr. Hurley.*

OetoN, J.

There is neither a certificate of the judge before whom this case was tried, nor stipulation of the parties, that the bill of exceptions contains all of the evidence given on the trial; and therefore the exceptions taken to the refusal of the court to grant a nonsuit, or to the instructions given to the jury, are of no avail, and cannot be considered by this court. *Paine v. Smith,*32 Wis., 335. For the same reason, the jury must be presumed to have found upon sufficient evidence, that the services were rendered upon the contract, and that such contract was made with the plaintiff, and that it was performed by the plaintiff, as alleged in the complaint, as well as every other fact necessary to the plaintiff’s recovery in the case. *Eaton et al. v. Woolly,*28 Wis., 628.

No error is apparent from the record as made.

*By the Court.*— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME  OF
COMPUTERIZED THERMAL IMAGING, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED
JUNE 30, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001021853
<NAME> COMPUTERIZED THERMAL IMAGING, INC. & SUBSIDIARIES

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       8,997,767
<SECURITIES>                                26,034,399
<RECEIVABLES>                                  181,854
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,600
<INVENTORY>                                    110,206
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,273,303
<PP&E>                                         776,962
<DEPRECIATION>                                 209,026
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              51,462,670
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,177,825
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    82,854,318
<OTHER-SE>                                (34,569,473)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                51,462,670
<SALES>                                      1,166,965
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,166,965
<CGS>                                          176,936
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,060,120
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,849,705
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,479
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,893,155)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,893,155)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,893,155)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.13)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             187
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,453
<ALLOWANCES>                                       590
<INVENTORY>                                      9,908
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,453
<PP&E>                                          19,646
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (9,872)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,980
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,879
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            96
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,980
<SALES>                                         25,840
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,088
<CGS>                                           13,245
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,969
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,371
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (305)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (80)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (225)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (225)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2015430EN.01000202.xml

| 22.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 430/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 430/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7826 — Bertelsmann/Prinovis)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 430/04)

On 11 December 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 German 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 32015M7826. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7826. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
Exhibit 21.0
**SUBSIDIARIES OF FAMOUS DAVE’S OF AMERICA, INC.**        **Entity**  **FEIN** **% of Ownership** Famous Dave’s of America, Inc. 41-1782300  100%       D&D of Minnesota, Inc. 41-1856702  100%       Famous Dave’s Properties of Texas, Inc. 61-1412539  100%       Famous Dave’s Ribs of Maryland, Inc. 41-1958496  97%       Famous Dave’s Ribs of Texas, Inc. 30-0070809  100%       Famous Dave’s Ribs of Texas, LP 37-1428481  100%       Famous Dave’s Ribs, Inc. 41-1884517  100%       Famous Dave’s Ribs-U, Inc. 41-1884548  100%       FDA Properties of Texas, LP 30-0070820  100%       FDA Properties, Inc. 36-4379010  100%       Lake & Hennepin BBQ and Blues, Inc. 41-1834594  100%       Minwood Partners, Inc. 51-0396229  100%
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 07
- 00172
- CR JAMES WILEY BARNES, III , Appellant
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006
- 586
- C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION
James Wiley Barnes, III appeals the trial court’s revocation of his deferred adjudication community supervision and imposition of a six

- year prison sentence. We will affirm the trial court’s judgment. Barnes had entered into a negotiated plea agreement in which he pled guilty t o the second

- degree felony offense of aggravated assault

— threat with a deadly weapon and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for five years , beginning June 20, 2006

. The State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt on March 21, 2007 ,Barnes v. State Page 2

all eging fifteen violations of community super vision. After an April 27, 2007 hearing, on April 30, 2007, the trial court found Barnes guilty and assessed the six

- year sentence. Barnes appeals, asserting in two issues that he did not fail to avoid injurious or vicious
habits and that he did not fail to avoid contact with the victim. The State points out that Barnes may not raise these issues under the version of section 5(b) of article 42.12 in effect at the time of Barnes’s guilty plea and the adjudication proceedings.
A defendant was statutorily prohibited from complaining on appeal of errors occurring at the hearing on the State’s motion to proceed to adjudication. Gray v. State, 134 S.W.3d 471, 472 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2004, pet. denied) (citing Connolly v. S tate, 983
S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)) . At the time relevant to this case, section 5(b) provided: “The defendant is entitled to a hearing limited to the determination by the court of whether it proceeds with an adjudication of guilt on the ori ginal charge. No appeal may be taken from this determination. ” See Act of May 28, 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., ch. 1308, § 5, 2007 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 4404, 4405 (amending section 5(b) to provide that the
trial court’s “determination is reviewable in the same manner as a revocation hearing conducted under Section 21” of Article 42.12) (emphasis added) (current version at T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. A NN
. art. 42.12, § 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 200 8 )); see Durgan v. State, 240 S.W.3d 875, 877

- 78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).
Sect ion 5(b) of article 42.12 has been amended to treat decisions to adjudicate similarly to decisions to revoke community supervision, but the amended statuteBarnes v. State Page 3

applies only to decisions to adjudicate made on or after June 15, 2007. Durgan, 240
S.W.3d at 877 n .1 ; see T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. A NN
. art. 42.12, § 5(b)

. Under the applicable law, we dismiss Barnes’s two issues. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

REX D. DAVIS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Reyna , and Justice Davis Affirmed Opinion d elivered and filed April 1 , 2009 Do n ot p ublish [C R25]