alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
gss_ex10-10.htm




 


U.S. smoothie market more than doubles


 


FoodProcessing.com


 


02/22/2007


 


 


With on-the-go dining and snacking moving to the American meal forefront, the U.S. smoothie market has been flooded with consumers looking for a quick portable meal alternative.


 


According to market research firm Mintel, smoothie makers raked in more than $2 billion from made-to-order and packaged smoothies in 2006, up more than 80 percent in the last five years.


 


The market for health-conscious products continues to grow rapidly. Smoothies have quickly become part of the American landscape, with more than 4,000 retail locations reported in the U.S. last year. According to Mintel research, more than half of respondents in the 18 to 34 year-old range said that they had a smoothie in the last month.


 


“Consumers are attracted to smoothies because they are seen as a healthier option to most sweets and on-the-go meals,” said David Lockwood, director of Mintel Reports. “Now that the smoothie market is a proven success, companies are being pushed to the next level — extreme differentiation. Similar to the coffee market, smoothie companies need to continue developing innovative flavors and additives to keep consumers engaged in the market, but also should consider expanding the menu as some chains have done with sandwiches or coffee.”


 


The smoothie industry’s new offerings are using emerging flavors, such as açaí and green tea, and hybrids of smoothies with other drink types. New nutrient “boosts” feed consumer need for evolving offerings as well. Smoothie companies have also remained on track with current food trends, utilizing “all-natural,” low-calorie and other key buzz properties to build sales.


 


“The flavor combinations and possibilities are endless with the smoothie market,” said Lockwood. “With functional foods and beverages having a strong marketplace advantage, smoothies are in position to dominate the healthy beverages category. Smoothies are seen as a pleasant health treat, and this will continue to take the category far.”


 


In contrast with yogurt drinks, 39 percent of Mintel respondents agreed or strongly agreed that “smoothies are healthier than drinks made with yogurt.” Similarly, more than half of consumers agreed or strongly agreed that “smoothies taste better than yogurt drinks,” with yogurts getting only 15 percent.
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Orchid BioSciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |  |                                                  
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Dated: November 12, 2004 |  | /S/ PAUL J. KELLY, MD                            
|                         |  | Paul J. Kelly, MD                                
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer                          
|                         |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                    
|                         | 
|Dated: November 12, 2004 |  | /S/ MICHAEL E. SPICER                            
|                         |  | Michael E. Spicer                                
|                         |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                         |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)     



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


Administrative Services Agreement


Amendment No. 1







This Amendment dated April 30, 2010 to the Administrative Services Agreement (the “Agreement”) originally dated March 1, 2010 by and between B Green Innovations, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (“B Green”) and iVoice, Inc.., a New Jersey corporation (the “Company”).







WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to amend this Agreement.







NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the respective promises and agreements of the parties set forth herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:








	
1.  

	
The Term as defined in Section 2.1 of this Agreement shall be amended to commence on January 1, 2010.













	
2.  

	
Section 3 of the Agreement shall be deleted and amended with the following language:












“In consideration for the Services, the Company shall pay B Green a monthly fee of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) per month.  The Fees shall accrue and be evidenced by a Convertible Promissory Note dated April 30, 2010 signed by the Company in favor of B Green in the form as attached hereto.”








	
3.  

	
All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be duly executed as of date written below:












B Green Innovations, Inc.                                                                     iVoice, Inc..







By:___________________________________                                  By:_____________________________


Jerome Mahoney                                                                           Jerome Mahoney


President and Chief Executive Officer                                        President and Chief Executive Officer
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

MAY 18, 2012

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 11-10153 

 ________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 2:10-cr-00036-CEH-DNF-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

 versus

DARRYL LAMAR POWELL, 

a.k.a. Darrell Powell, 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Middle District of Florida

 ________________________

(May 18, 2012)

Before WILSON, ANDERSON, and HIGGINBOTHAM,* Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

___________________________

*Honorable Patrick E. Higginbotham, United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit,

sitting by designation.
Darryl Lamar Powell appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of

a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§

922(g) and 924(e). The Court has considered all of Powell’s specifications of

error, including:

(1) whether two of Powell’s prior state convictions, which serve as the basis

for his Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) enhancement, were “committed on

occasions different from one another,” as required by 18 U.S.C. § 924(e);

(2) whether a jury must determine beyond a reasonable doubt the facts

underlying the ACCA’s statutory requirements, specifically, whether the prior

crimes were committed on different occasions; 

(3) whether the district court improperly admitted evidence pursuant to Fed.

R. Evid. 404(b), and failed to grant a mistrial;

(4) whether parts of the government’s closing statement provided grounds

for a mistrial;

(5) whether the effects of the trial errors cumulatively denied Powell a fair

trial;

(6) whether the jury instructions constructively amended the indictment;

(7) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions;

(8) whether the information that supplied probable cause to search Powell’s

2
residence was stale; and

(9) whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s

authority under the Commerce Clause.

After review and consideration of the briefs and the record, and having the

benefit of oral argument, we find no harmful error in the proceedings in the district

court. Therefore, the decision of the district court is 

AFFIRMED. 

3
exv10w2






Exhibit 10.2




BATUS JAPAN, INC.




103 Foulk Road

Suite 117

Wilmington, Delaware 19803




May 26, 2010




R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

401 North Main Street

Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27101



Attention: Martin L. Holton III, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary




	 	 	 

	Re:

	 	Contract Manufacturing Agreement dated July 30, 2004 by and between R.J. Reynolds Tobacco
Company (“RJRTC”) and BATUS Japan, Inc (“BATUS Japan”) (the “Contract Manufacturing Agreement”) — Termination





Dear Mark:



We refer to the Contract Manufacturing Agreement and the agreement between RJRTC and BATUS Japan
that, in accordance with Sub-Section 4.2(a) of the Contract Manufacturing Agreement, the Contract
Manufacturing Agreement shall, subject to the following paragraphs, be terminated in its entirety
with effect from midnight on December 31, 2009.



Notwithstanding Sub-Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.6 and 4.7 of the Contract Manufacturing Agreement:





	(i)	 	the provisions of Sections and Sub-Sections 1 (Definitions), 3.4 (Rejected Products), 3.5
(Audit Rights of BATUS Japan), 3.6 (Audit Rights of RJRTC), 5 (Confidentiality), 6.2
(Limitation of Remedies, Liability and Damages), 6.6 (Export Laws), 6.8 (BATUS Japan’s
Indemnity Obligations), 6.9 (RJRTC’s Indemnity Obligations), 7.5 (Governing Law), 7.6
(Jurisdiction), 7.7 (Alternative Dispute Resolution) and 7.10 (Notices) (the “Surviving
Provisions”) will continue in effect after termination;
	 
	(ii)	 	other than the Surviving Provisions, no provisions of the Contract Manufacturing Agreement
will continue in effect after termination (including, for the avoidance of doubt, Sub-Section
4.4 (Right of First Refusal));
	 
	(iii)	 	the provisions of Sub-Section 4.3 (Effect of Termination) shall not apply to the agreed
termination and shall be deemed deleted from the Contract Manufacturing Agreement; and
	 
	(iv)	 	subject to the paragraph below, termination will not impair or extinguish any accrued right,
obligation or liability that either RJRTC or BATUS Japan may have under the Contract
Manufacturing Agreement as at the date of this letter.




In consideration of RJRTC agreeing to terminate the Contract Manufacturing Agreement on the terms
set out above and the full and final settlement of all disputes currently at issue between RJRTC
and BATUS Japan associated with the Contract Manufacturing Agreement, BATUS Japan shall pay to
RJRTC the sum of twenty million five hundred and twenty eight thousand United States dollars
(US$20,528,000) within thirty days of the date of this letter.






 









 








R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

RE: Contract Manufacturing Agreement dated July 30, 2004

Page Two

May 26, 2010



Please confirm RJRTC is in agreement with the above by executing below and returning an original.



Yours faithfully,




	 	 	 	 	 
	BATUS JAPAN, INC

 	 	 
	By:  	/s/ Teresa Riggs
 	 	 
	 	Title: President 	 	 
	 	 	 	 


Date: May 26, 2010




	 	 	 	 	 
	AGREED AND ACCEPTED:



R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY

 	 	 
	By:  	/s/ Martin L. Holton III
 	 	 
	 	Title:  Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary 	 	 
	 	 	 	 


Date: 05/26/2010
Exhibit 10.16
 Tollgrade Communications, Inc.
2006 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan
 STOCK APPRECIATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT
    1. Grant of SARs .
 2. SARs .
 3. Vesting and Forfeiture .
  Page 1 of 3




---



##### 



4. Exercise Procedures .
  5. Termination of SARs .
 6. Withholding of Taxes .
 7. Interpretation of Plan and Agreement .
 8. Effect of Agreement on Rights of Company and the Grantee .
 9. Binding Effect .
 10. Entire Agreement .
 11. Amendment .
 12. Governing Law .
 Page 2 of 3




---



##### 



TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.By:

/s/ Jennifer M. ReinkeName: Jennifer M. ReinkeTitle:  General Counsel and Secretary WITNESS:/s/ Joseph OBrien
    
    /s/ Edward H. KennedyEdward H. Kennedy
 Page 3 of 3
Unassociated Document


    
      	
              To
      :

            	
              Board
      of Directors

            


    

    
      	
               
      

            	
              Infosmart
      Group, Inc.

            


    

    


    


    


    Date : 27
May 2010

    


    RESIGNATION

    


    This
letter serves to inform all of you that with immediate effective, I resign my
position as a director of Infosmart Group, Inc. due to my personal
reasons.

    


    I
appreciate very much to work with all of you in the past year and I wish the
company a healthy and growing future by your valuable & continuous
contribution.

    


    Thank you
very much

    


    


    Yours
sincerely,

    


    


    


    /s/ Lee Siu
Po                


    Lee Siu
Po
#### William Musgrove, *et. al. vs.*Jesse Wofford *and*Samuel Jamison.

*Bill to compel tenants for life of slaves, to give security for their forth coming. 2 he answerers denying allfraudulent intention to remove the property or defeat complainants'’ rights, the bill was dismissed.*

*Irby*and *Goodman,*for appellants;

*Roddy*and *J, W. Farrow,*contra.

The complainants allege in their bill, that Edward Mus-grove, their father, in 1790, made his will and died, leaving the same unrevoked. Thai among other things, he made the following bequest: — “I give to my loving wife, Ann, during life, rny plantation and five negroes, to wit: Tom, Phillis, Jude,' Kissy and Lott, to raise and maintain herself and children; and after her death, to be equally divided among my children.” That Ann Musgrove intermarried with one David Smith, who sold and conveyed his wife’s life estate in said negroes: That the negro Kissy and her children, Phillis, Stephen, and Silvy, are now in the possession of Samuel Jamison: That Jesse Wofford has in his possession two, to wit: Dick and Phillis, the issue of the negro Lott; and that the said Jesse Wofford has altered the names of said negroes, to defraud your orators as remainder-men, and to prevent the negroes being identified; and that complainants have just reasons to believe that said negroes will be removed to parts unknown, before the death of the tenant for life. The bill, prays that defendants may be required to give security not to remove said negroes until the determinationof the life estate, &c. ,

The defendants admit that they have the negroes in possession; but deny that they intend to remove them. The defendant, Wofford, admits that he altered the names of some of the negroes; but states that he did it for convenience.

At the hearing, the presiding chancellor dismissed the bill; and on appeal, his decree vvas.confirmed by the whole court,
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Annual Report of Atari, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bruno Bonnell, Chairman of the
Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant 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 financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

                                         By: /s/ Bruno Bonnell
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Name: Bruno Bonnell
                                             Title: Chairman of the Board and
                                                      Chief Executive Officer

Date: July 15, 2003
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Cory Colvin, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Enviro-Energy Corporation (the Registrant) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant for the fiscal period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Registrant.

Date:  May 24, 2004

/s/ Cory Colvin

Cory Colvin

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



















































19





#
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T C AR L OS AL F R E DO L UG OM I RA M O N TES, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 70443 A ge nc yN o. A 077- 195- 285 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r19, 2011 ** B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dM cK E O W N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C ar l os A l f

r e do L ugo- M i r am ont e s , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

the B oar d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ or de rdi s m i s s i ng hi s appe a l f r om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i ons f ora dj us tm e ntof

s t a tus and w a i ve r s of

i na dm i s s i bi l i tyunde r8 U . S . C . § 1182( a ) ( 9) ( B ) ( v) and 1182( i ) . O ur 

# FI LED DE C 30 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 70443 2 j u r i s d i c t i o n i s g o v e rn e db y8 U. S . C . § 1 2 5 2 . We r e v i e w d e n o v o qu e s t i o n s o f l aw. H am azaspyan v. H

older , 59 0 F . 3d 74 4, 74 7 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). W e di sm i ss i n p art an dd e n yin p art th e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . W e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w the a ge nc y ’ s de c i s i on t o de nyL ugoM i r a m ont e s ’ appl i c a t i ons f orw a i ve r s of

i na dm i s s i bi l i ty , w hi c h w e r e de ni e d f or f a i l ur e t o s how e xtr e m e har ds hi p t o aqua l i f y i ng r e l a t i ve , a s w e l l a s hi s appl i c a t i on f o ra d ju s tm e n t o f

s ta tu s , w h ic h w a s d e n ie din th e e x e r c is e o f d is c r e tio n . See 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) . L u g o - M ir am o n te s ’ c o n te n tio n th a t th e a g e n c ye rr o n e o u s lyr e lie do n h is a tt e m pt e d f

r audul e nte ntryi n 1998 t o de nyhi s appl i c a t i ons f orr e l i e f i s not s up p o rte db yth e r e c o r d , an dth e r e f o r e d o e s n o t am o u n t to ac o lo r ab le c o n s titu tio n a l c la im . P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D IS M IS S E D i n p art; D E N IE D i n p art.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE  SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that this periodic report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in this periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Advent Software, Inc.

March 9, 2011

/s/ JAMES S. COX James S. Cox Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Accounting Officer)


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Advent Software, Inc. and will be retained by Advent Software, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
# Diario Oficial C 250/2019

| | ISSN 1977-0928 |
| --- | --- |
| Diario Oficial
  de la Unión Europea | C 250 |
| | |
| Edición en lengua española | Comunicaciones e informaciones | 62.° año25 de julio de 2019 |

ISSN 1977-0928

Diario Oficial

de la Unión Europea

C 250

Edición en lengua española

Comunicaciones e informaciones

62.° año25 de julio de 2019

---

| Sumario | Página |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Información |
| | INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA |
| | Parlamento EuropeoConsejo |
| 2019/C 250/01 | Declaración común del Parlamento Europeo, del Consejo y de la Comisión relativa al Reglamento (UE) 2019/1243 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 20 de junio de 2019, por el que se adapta a los artículos 290 y 291 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea una serie de actos jurídicos que prevén el recurso al procedimiento de reglamentación con control | 1 |

Sumario

Página

IV   Información

INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA

Parlamento EuropeoConsejo

2019/C 250/01

Declaración común del Parlamento Europeo, del Consejo y de la Comisión relativa al Reglamento (UE) 2019/1243 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 20 de junio de 2019, por el que se adapta a los artículos 290 y 291 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea una serie de actos jurídicos que prevén el recurso al procedimiento de reglamentación con control

1

---

| ES | |
| --- | --- |

ES

---

IV Información

INFORMACIÓN PROCEDENTE DE LAS INSTITUCIONES, ÓRGANOS Y ORGANISMOS DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA

Parlamento Europeo Consejo

| 25.7.2019 | ES | Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea | C 250/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2019

ES

Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea

C 250/1

---

Declaración común del Parlamento Europeo, del Consejo y de la Comisión relativa al Reglamento (UE) 2019/1243 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 20 de junio de 2019, por el que se adapta a los artículos 290 y 291 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea una serie de actos jurídicos que prevén el recurso al procedimiento de reglamentación con control (1)

(2019/C 250/01)

En el punto 27 del Acuerdo interinstitucional sobre la mejora de la legislación, las tres instituciones reconocieron la necesidad de que toda la legislación vigente se adapte al marco jurídico que introdujo el Tratado de Lisboa, y en particular de que se conceda la mayor prioridad a la rápida adaptación de todos los actos de base que siguen refiriéndose al procedimiento de reglamentación con control. Presentada ya la propuesta de la Comisión a tal efecto, el presente Reglamento atiende a esa necesidad disponiendo la adaptación del procedimiento de reglamentación con control en un número importante de actos incluidos en dicha propuesta. Las tres instituciones seguirán trabajando en la adaptación de los demás actos de dicha propuesta.

---

(1)  DO L 198 de 25.7.2019, p. 241.

---