alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
10.19 


 


MASTER
ALLONGE


 


This
Master Allonge to those certain Convertible Promissory Notes (as hereinafter defined as the “Allonge”) is made and entered
into as of the 28th day of April, 2021, by and between the Borrower, Kidpik Corp., a Delaware corporation and the Lenders,
(Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah, co-trustees, u/a/d 02/02/1997, Trust FBO Chana Dabah, Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah, co-trustees,
u/a/d 02/02/1997, Trust FBO Eva Dabah, Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah, co-trustees, u/a/d 02/02/1997, Trust FBO Joia Dabah, Raine
Silverstein & Renee Dabah, co-trustees, u/a/d 02/02/1997, Trust FBO Moshe Dabah, Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah, co- trustees,
u/a/d 02/02/1997, Trust FBO Yaacov Dabah, and Ezra Dabah)


 


WHEREAS,
the Borrower executed in favor of the Lenders the following Convertible Promissory Notes:


 


	Holder	 	Date	 	Amount
	Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah,

                                             co-trustees, u/a/d 0202/1997,

                                             Trust FBO Chana Dabah
	 	 	03/15/21	 	 	$	50.000.00	 
		 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah,

                                 co-trustees, u/a/d 0202/1997,

                                 Trust FBO Eva Dabah
	 	 	03/15/21	 	 	$	50.000.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah,

                                 co-trustees, u/a/d 0202/1997,

                                 Trust FBO Moshe Dabah
	 	 	03/15/21	 	 	$	50.000.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Raine Silverstein & Renee Dabah,

                                 co-trustees, u/a/d 0202/1997,

                                 Trust FBO Yaacov Dabah
	 	 	03/15/21	 	 	$	50.000.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Ezra Dabah	 	 	01/21/21	 	 	$	100,000.00	 
		 	 	02/24/21	 	 	$	500,000.00	 
		 	 	03/19/21	 	 	$	400,000.00	 
		 	 	03/31/21	 	 	$	100,000.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Renee Dabah	 	 	01/21/21	 	 	$	200,000.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Gila Goodman	 	 	01/04/21	 	 	$	500,000.00	 



 




    1


     


    

 


WHEREAS,
in order to amend the payment terms under the Convertible Promissory Notes, the parties have agreed to execute this Allonge.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants herein contained, the undersigned agree as follows:


 


	 	1.	The
    Lenders agree to amend the payment terms set forth on the Convertible Promissory Notes by amending the definition of “Maturity
    Date” to January 15, 2021.
	 	 	 
	 	2.	Except
    as amended or revised by this Allonge, the terms of the Convertible Promissory Notes remain in full force and effect as of the date
    hereof. In the event the terms of the Convertible Promissory Notes should conflict with this Allonge, the terms of this Allonge shall
    control.
	 	 	 
	 	3.	This
    Allonge shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York.
	 	 	 
	 	4.	An
    E-mail or facsimile copy of this Allonge shall be deemed an original for all purposes.


 




    2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,093,631
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  727,050
<ALLOWANCES>                                   110,882
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,520,407
<PP&E>                                       2,864,589
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,330,489
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,361,616
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,392,742
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      5,912
<COMMON>                                         6,423
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,927,361
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,361,615
<SALES>                                      1,778,459
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,778,459
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,359,557
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,259,268
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                88,875
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,656
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,840,367)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,840,367)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.12)


</TABLE>
#### Strup vs. Edens.

*Negligence*— Evidence.

In an action for an injury occasioned by defendant’s horses while running away, the fact that they got loose after being hitched would be some evidence of negligence on his part.

ERROR to the Circuit Court for *Fond du Lae*County.

The action below was by *Edens*against *Strap,*for an injury to the daughter of the former done by the horses of the latter when running away. After a nonsuit had been denied, and after *Sirup*had introduced his evidence, there was a verdict and judgment for *Edens.*The only question here was, whether, when the nonsuit was denied, negligence on the part of the plaintiff in error had been shown.

*Gillet Pier,*for plaintiff in error,

to the point that the law will not infer negligence merely from the injury, cited *Terry v. P. B.,*22 Barb., 586; *Cox v. Burhridge,*106 E. C. L., 430; *Hammack v. White,*103 id., 587; *Jackson v. Smithson,*15 M. & W., 563; *Vrooman v. Lawyer,*13 Johns., 339; *Panton v. Holland,*17 id., 92; *Clark v. Foot,*8 id., 421; *433
      *Tourtellot v. Bosebrook,*11 Met., 460; *Shrewsbury v. Smith,*12 push., 180; *Holly v. Gas Go.,*8 G-ray, *123; Holbrook v. B. B.,*12 U. Y., 236; 18 id., 248; *Bicharás v. Sperry,*2 Wis., 216; 7 id., 425, 527; 8 id., 255.

*Blair Coleman,*for defendant in error.

Paine, J.

This action was brought for an injury to the plaintiff’s daughter, occasioned by the horses of the defendant while running away. The only exception urged here, is to. the refusal of the court to grant the motion for a non-suit. But at the time that motion was made, there was evidence tending to show that the horses were not properly hitched. The evidence of Smith tended to show that. And, in addition to his evidence, the fact that the horses got loose and ran away is some evidence of negligence. It is true, such a thing might occur notwithstanding due care in hitching. But-such would not he the ordinary result; and,' unexplained, the reasonable inference from the fact would be, that there had been negligence in fastening the horses. The motion for a nonsuit was therefore properly overruled.

There is no exception presenting the question, whether, on the whole evidence, the verdict ought to have been sustained.

*By the Court.*— The judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Sr4,. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY0

REGION

IXLPn0

75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco,
CA 94105•3901 Deeember 23, 2011 Jihan Gearon Executive Director Black Mesa Water Coalition Post Office Box 613 Flagstaff,
AZ 86002 Dear. Ms. Gearon: Thank you, and all of the Navajo Nation residents, for yourletter of November
17, 2011 to EPA Administrator
Lisa Jackson regarding your support
of US EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rulemaking.

As youarenodoubt aware by now,EPA finalized the MATS rule on December
16, 2011. EPA shares yourconcern about threats
to public health from mercuryand toxic air pollution. The MATS rule will reduce emissions from new and existing coal and oil-fired power plants, including Navajo Generating Station, San Juan Power Plant, Cholla Power Plant, and the Four Corners Power Plant. MATS will also reduce emissions

of heavy metals and acid gases which are known or suspected

of causing cancerand other serious health effects. This newrule will save thousands

of lives and prevent more than 100,000 heart and asthma attacks each year while providing important health protections

to the most vulnerable, such aschildren and older adults. Detailed information

onthis rule
is available
onourweb pageat: h:tp://www.epa.gov/mats or by calling our toll-free EPA Region

9 public information hotline
at 1-866-947-8000. Please feel free to share this letter with all interested parties.

If youhave additional questions

or concerns,fee! free to call me at 520-498-0118.

Sincerely, L/L 4 t /‘J J i-(Colleen McKaughan Associate Director, Air Division Cc: Office of Air and Radiation—Immediate Office Office of International
and Tribal Affairs Region

9—Immediate OfficePnnredon1?ecvcled Paper
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Docket ID FEMA-2015-0001; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1436

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Proposed notice; withdrawal.

# SUMMARY:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is withdrawing its proposed notices concerning proposed flood hazard determinations, which may include the addition or modification of any Base Flood Elevation, base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway (herein after referred to as proposed flood hazard determinations) on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps and, where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study reports for Lee County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas and Ogle County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas.

# DATES:

These withdrawals are effective March 19, 2015.

# ADDRESSES:

                        You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1436 to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4064, or (email)                         *Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov*.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4064, or (email)                         *Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On November 3, 2014, FEMA published proposed notices at 79 FR 65231, proposing flood hazard determinations for Lee County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas and Ogle County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas. FEMA is withdrawing the proposed notices.

Authority:42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.

Dated: February 23, 2015.

Roy E. Wright,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2015-06337 Filed 3-18-15; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
Last updated on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

National Estuaries Program

http://w ater.epa.gov/type/oceb/nep/index.cfm

National Estuary Program Booklet (PDF) (11

pp, 2.8MB, About PDF)

Cover Photo Credit:

Mark Lagrange

Features

The National Estuary Program in Action

State of Our NEP Estuaries

National Estuary Program Evaluation

Guidance - Final (PDF) (32 pp, 886K, About

PDF)

Smart Grow th: Estuary Protection and

Improvement

Climate Ready Estuaries

National Estuary Program Multimedia

Announcing the availability of

EPA’s 2008 National Coastal Condition Report

III

Announcing the availability of EPA's 2004-

2006 National Estuary Program (NEP)

Implementation Report (PDF)

(14 pp, 1MB, About PDF)

Previous Features

You are here: Water Our Waters Oceans, Coasts, Estuaries & Beaches National Estuary Program

National Estuary Program

Estuaries are places where rivers meet the sea. Estuaries are critical to the health of coastal

environments and to our enjoyment of them.

EPA's National Estuary Program was established by Congress in 1987 to improve the quality of

estuaries of national importance. The Clean Water Act Section 320 directs EPA to develop plans for

attaining or maintaining water quality in an estuary. This includes protection of public water supplies and

the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and

allows recreational activities, in and on water, requires that control of point and nonpoint sources of

pollution to supplement existing controls of pollution. In several cases, more than one State is

participating in a National Estuary Program. Each program establishes a Comprehensive Conservation

and Management Plan to meet the goals of Section 320.

In addition to water quality improvements, habitat restoration and protection is one of the

major focuses of the National Estuary Program. View NEP goals and plans, as well as

learn about habitat loss and degradation, and its contributing factors.

Local NEP Project information is available including maps, project descriptions, and

photos.

NEPs are effective, efficient, collaborative, and adaptive community-based programs. To

find out more, see the vibrant NEP booklet below. To order free copies of this publication, simply call 800-490-9198 and request

the EPA document number provided.

EPA's National Estuary Program is proud of its progress and has had many successes.

The NEPs have succeeded because:

they focus on the watershed,

use science to inform decision-making,

emphasize collaborative problem solving, and

involve the public.

The successes of the National Estuary Program are largely a result of the programs' ability

to develop long term, sustainable finance strategies.

Share

3/15/2011 National Estuary Program | National E...

water.epa.gov/type/oceb/.../index.cfm 1/1
**Exhibit 23**
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8, previouslyfiled by Home City Financial Corporation on August 27, 2003, of our report dated February 14, 2005on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Home City Financial Corporation, as ofDecember 31, 2004 and 2003 and for the years then ended which report and financial statements arecontained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.      /s/**BKD, llp   **      BKD, llp**  
Cincinnati, Ohio**
#### Felker and another vs. Haight.

*Implied contract to pay for attorney's services.*

Defendant *held liable for services*rendered hy plaintiffs as attorneys in collecting and securing the *demands of defendant and all other creditors*against a debtor who had made a fraudulent conveyance of his property; such services having been rendered with defendant’s knowledge and consent, and pursuant to an implied (if not an express) request.

APPEAL from the County Court of *Winnebago*County.

*Moses Hooper,*for plaintiffs, who are also appellants.

*A.*Haight, defendant and respondent, in person.

Lyon, J.

A debtor in the city of Oshkosh made a fraudulent conveyance of his property. One of his creditors instituted proceedings in bankruptcy against him, and caused him to be arrested for the fraud. All of his creditors (of whom the defendant was one) thereupon entered into negotiations with the debtor for an adjustment of their demands. Such negotiations were conducted to a successful termination, and the whole indebtedness was paid or satisfactorily secured. The plaintiffs were the attorneys for the petitioning creditor in the bankruptcy proceedings, and acted as the attorneys for all of the creditors in such negotiations. They procured abstracts, examined titles, made computations, drew securities, and gave all necessary legal advice in the premises, with the knowledge and consent of all the creditors. The defendant was present and took an active and leading part in the adjustment. He frequently communicated with the plaintiffs in relation thereto, and the testimony tends to show that, in some particulars at least, the}1- acted by his express request. There was no special agreement between the creditors as to how the plaintiffs should be paid for their services. The evidence is undisputed that those services were worth two per cent, of the amount paid and *260secured. The defendant’s demand thus paid or secured was $5,800. The debtor paid the costs and expenses of the bankruptcy proceedings, and each creditor (except the defendant) has paid the plaintiffs for their services in collecting or securing his demand, at the rate above mentioned. We are not aware of the existence of any rule of law which will relieve the defendant from the obligation to pay for services thus rendered for his benefit, with his knowledge and consent, and pursuant to his implied (if not express) request.

The action was tried in the county court without a jury, and the findings and judgment were for the defendant.

*By the*Court.— The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to that court to render judgment for the plaintiffs for $116, and interest thereon from the date of the commencement of the action.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000352715
<NAME> BIOSONICS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             260
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,829
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,000
<INVENTORY>                                     63,725
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                79,191
<PP&E>                                         254,806
<DEPRECIATION>                                 242,801
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  99,627
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,046,853
<BONDS>                                        243,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,636
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,947,226)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    99,627
<SALES>                                         13,550
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,766
<CGS>                                            8,297
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  420,133
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               287,545
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,415
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (412,664)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (412,664)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 23.1

                        INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Guitar Center, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on 
Form S-8 of Guitar Center, Inc. and subsidiary of our report dated February 
9, 1999, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Guitar Center, 
Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related 
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit), and 
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 
1998, which report appears in the December 31, 1998, annual report on Form 
10-K of Guitar Center, Inc. and subsidiary.

                                       KPMG LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 12, 1999
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2


                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Richard V. Secord, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30,
2006 of Computerized Thermal Imaging, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

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

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

c) disclosed in this annual 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.

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, auditors and the registrant's board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies 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 controls.


Date: September 27, 2006
/s/ Richard V. Secord
------------------------------
Richard V. Secord
Acting Chief Financial Officer