alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.8(b)






Exhibit 10.8(b)




VWR INTERNATIONAL, LLC

1310 Goshen Parkway

PO Box 2656

West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380




December 18, 2008




Matthew Malenfant

236 Upland Way

Wayne, PA 19087




Dear Matt:



In order to comply with final regulations under §409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, the terms of your employment agreement dated June 29, 2007, are hereby revised as follows:



The second and third paragraphs of the section entitled “Severance/Restrictive Covenants”
are revised to read as follows:




If you incur a Disability (as defined on Annex 1), you will be entitled to
receive a lump-sum payment, as soon as practicable following your Disability but in
no event later than March 15 of the calendar year following the calendar year in
which such Disability is incurred, in an amount equal to the target amount of your
bonus for the year in which such Disability is incurred, prorated for the portion of
such year during which you were employed with VWR. In addition, you shall be
entitled to receive payments of your base salary until payments to you under VWR’s
long-term disability plan commence but in any event for a period not to exceed 18
months from the date of your termination of employment.




If your employment with VWR and its affiliates is terminated by reason of your
death, your beneficiary or estate, as applicable, will be entitled to receive a
lump-sum payment as soon as practicable following your death but in no event later
than March 15 of the calendar year following the calendar year in which your death
occurs, in an amount equal to the target amount of your bonus for the year in which
your death occurs, prorated for the portion of such year during which you were
employed with VWR.



If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (610) 692-1060.




Sincerely,




/s/
John Ballbach                     
                         
John Ballbach



Accepted and Agreed:



	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/
Matthew Malenfant
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	Matthew Malenfant	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Date:
	 	12/18/08
<PAGE>


                                   EXHIBIT 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


1)   With Design in Mind, a California corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary

2)   Janex Corporation, a New Jersey corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary

3)   Pro Gains Company Limited, a Hong Kong corporation 50% owned by the Company
     and 50% owned by Janex

4)   Malibu Fun Stuffed, Inc., a California corporation, a wholly-owned
     subsidiary

5)   Malibu Fun Stuffed International Limited, a Hong Kong corporation 99% owned
     by Malibu Fund Stuffed, Inc. and 100% owned by the Company
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000882342
<NAME> 90CC.TXT
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          95,046
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   79,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               174,646
<PP&E>                                       5,744,877
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,261,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,657,710
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,740
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,626,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,657,710
<SALES>                                        584,930
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               588,581
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  359,802
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                228,779
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            228,779
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   228,779
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    30.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document









































 
 

  Exhibit 10.10    
    


 Axcelis Technologies, Inc.

Non-Employee Director Cash Compensation at March 1, 2009  


        This Exhibit discloses the current understandings with respect to cash compensation between Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") and each of its non-employee directors. Axcelis provides both cash retainers and meeting fees to its non-employee directors, as follows: 



					
	Annual Retainers (paid quarterly in advance)


 
	 
	Board Member Position



 
	 	Amount 	 
	 Lead Director
	 	$	50,000	 
	 Non-Employee Board Member (not Lead Director)
	 	$	30,000	 
	 Audit Committee Chair*
	 	$	15,000	 
	 Compensation Committee Chair*
	 	$	10,000	 
	 Nominating Committee Chair*
	 	$	7,500	 











	*
	Retainers
for Committee Chairs are in addition to the retainer payable to all non-employee Board members. 




					
	Meeting Fees (payable quarterly in arrears)


 
	 
	Meeting Type



 
	 	Amount Per Meeting 	 
	 In Person Board Meetings
	 	$	2,000	 
	 Telephone Board Meetings
	 	$	1,000	 
	 In Person or Telephone Committee Meetings**
	 	$	1,000	 











	**
	Committee
meeting fees are paid only to committee members, and not to other Board me members, attending committee meetings. 



        Non-employee
directors also receive reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending Board and committee meetings.
Non-employee directors do not receive any Company-paid perquisites. 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.10
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,753,707
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      497,553
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        723,088
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,899,031
<PP&E>                                          70,561,944
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,470,672)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  69,658,269
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,903,689
<BONDS>                                         11,984,592
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         7,302,621
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,161,411
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    69,658,269
<SALES>                                          8,137,867
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,352,038
<CGS>                                            8,670,760
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,670,760
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,098,567
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,500,579
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (14,917,868)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (14,917,868)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0




</TABLE>
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with FED. R. APP. P. 32.1 

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Argued January 12, 2022 

Decided July 11, 2022 

Before

 JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

 FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

 DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

Nos. 21-2480 & 21-2573

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ALLIANCE, et al., 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 

 v. 

TODD ROKITA, Attorney General of Indiana, et al., 

Defendants-Appellants. 

Appeals from the United 

States District Court for the 

Southern District of Indiana, 

Indianapolis Division. 

No. 1:18-cv-01904-SEB-MJD

Sarah Evans Barker, 

Judge. 

O R D E R

The judgment of the District Court is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19–

1392 (U.S. June 24, 2022). This court does not now address the district court’s rulings 

based on the First Amendment, because they were influenced by pre-Dobbs decisions 

holding that abortion is a fundamental right. The District Court should reconsider all 

claims in this litigation in light of Dobbs and the government-speech doctrine of Pleasant 

Grove v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009), and Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate 

Veterans, Inc., 576 U.S. 200 (2015). Any appeals from the decision on remand will return 

to this panel.
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



|(1) | The accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: November 9, 2004



/s/ Fred B. ParksFred B. ParksChairman and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Todd E. PaulsonTodd E. PaulsonVice President and Chief Financial Officer
John COX, Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, a local municipality, Appellee.

No. 4D17-1578

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 19, 2018]

Isidro M. Garcia of the Garcia Law Firm, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Stephen A. Meck of Carson & Adkins, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Taylor, May and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
#### Gene Wirges *v.*State

5216

415 S. W. 2d 548

Opinion delivered June 5, 1967.

*G. Thomas Eisele,*for appellant.

*Joe Purcell,*Attorney General; *Lance L. Hanshuw,*Asst. Atty. General, for appellee.

CoNley Byrd, Justice.

Appellant, Gene Wirges, contends, among other things, that his first-degree perjury *857conviction should be dismissed because the alleged false statement in the indictment was not sustained by the proof.

The indictment charged Gene Wirges with the crime of perjury in the first degree in that he did willfully testify falsely while under oath in the Conway County Circuit Court case of *Scott*v. *Wirges,*by stating *“that he, the said Gene Wirges, did not write any portion of the Bird Town Birdie Column, which appeared in the ■July*4, 1963 *issue of the Morrilton Democrat.”*

The proof offered by the state was that, in the trial of the *Scott*v. *Wirges*case, appellant testified as follows :

> ‘ ‘ Q. How long have you been the editor and publisher of those papers?

> A. For the last six years-.

> Q. You are the defendant in this lawsuit in which Mr. Judge Scott is suing you for $200,000.00?

> A. That’s correct.

> Q. Now, there is an article complained of. Have you read it?

> A. Yes, sir.

> Q. Did you write it?

> A. No, sir.”

In *Blevins*v. *State,*85 Ark. 195, 107 S. W. 393 (1908), Mr. Blevins was convicted of perjury upon an indictment alleging that he had falsely testified that he had paid to E. B. McGuire the sum of $445. The proof showed that Blevins had testified that he met a man who pretended to be E. B. McGuire and paid him the money and took his receipt therefor. In dismissing the conviction, we there held that the proof must, in order to *858sustain a perjury indictment, conform to the allegations thereof; otherwise an acquittal of the charge would follow. See also *Clemons*v. *State,*150 Ark. 425, 234 S.W. 475 (1921), where we said:

> “.. ."We think that the result of a substantial variance between the allegations and the proof is necessarily a failure of proof, for the proof must conform to the allegations, and, unless it does, there is no evidence to sustain the verdict. . : .”

We think this case is governed by our holding in the *Blevins*case, *supra,*for there is a great difference in asking a man generally if he wrote an article and asking him specifically if he wrote any portion of it. Therefore, because of the variance between the allegation and the proof with respect to the statements allegedly made by appellant, this cause is reversed and dismissed.

Our dismissal of this cause upon this point makes it unnecessary to discuss other alleged errors.

Reversed and dismissed.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces its intent to hold proposal review meetings throughout the year. The purpose of these meetings is to provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to the NSF for financial support. The agenda for each of these meetings is to review and evaluate proposals as part of the selection process for awards. The review and evaluation may also include assessment of the progress of awarded proposals. These meetings will primarily take place at NSF's headquarters, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314.

These meetings will be closed to the public. The proposals being reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act. NSF will continue to review the agenda and merits of each meeting for overall compliance of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

                    These closed proposal review meetings will not be announced on an individual basis in the                     **Federal Register**                    . NSF intends to publish a notice similar to this on a quarterly basis. For an advance listing of the closed proposal review meetings that include the names of the proposal review panel and the time, date, place, and any information on changes, corrections, or cancellations, please visit the NSF website:                     *https://www.nsf.gov/​events/​advisory.jsp.*                     This information may also be requested by telephoning, 703/292-8687.                

 Dated: February 2, 2022.

Crystal Robinson,

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022-02465 Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
exv4w15







EXHIBIT
4.15




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO

SECURED CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE




     This amendment no. 2 (“Amendment”) to the Secured Convertible Debenture dated January 24, 2008
(the “Original Debenture”), as previously amended on January 29, 2009 (such prior amendment, the
“Prior Amendment” and with the Original Debenture, the “Debenture”) is made as of March 17, 2009 by
and between Converted Organics Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Borrower”) and HIGH CAPITAL FUNDING,
LLC (“Lender”).



RECITALS




     WHEREAS, Borrower has issued Lender the Debenture in principal amount of $500,000;



     WHEREAS, Borrower has agreed to modify certain terms of the Prior Amendment as set forth
herein; and



     WHEREAS, Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the
meanings set forth in the Debenture.



     NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, for themselves, their successors and assigns, hereby agree
as follows:



     1. Upon the execution of this Amendment, the Borrower agrees to waive Lender’s compliance
obligations with respect to Section 4 of the Prior Amendment.



     2. All other provisions of the Debenture not amended or modified herein shall continue to have
their full force and effect.



     3. This Amendment may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated only by a writing signed by
the Lender and Borrower.



     4. This Amendment shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the Sections 13 and 14
of the Original Debenture.



     5. This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, which when so executed shall
constitute one and the same agreement.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed as of March
17, 2009.



	 	 	 	 	 
	Converted Organics Inc.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

     Edward J. Gildea, CEO
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	HIGH CAPITAL FUNDING, LLC	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	     Frank E. Hart,	 	 
	 

	 	     President of Profit Concepts, Ltd., Manager	 	 






47
SUTHERLAND HOLDINGS II, LLC ; Old Tampa Bay Seafood Company, LLC ; and Brian Storman, Appellants, v. PINELLAS COUNTY, Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1295

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit
23













CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-76518, No. 333-70135, No. 333-82673, No. 333-35978, No. 333-40256, No.
333-134009, No. 333-144058, No. 333-151474 and No. 333-160468 on Form S-8, No.
333-152751 on Form S-3 of our reports dated  February 24, 2010,
relating to the financial statements of M/I Homes, Inc., and the effectiveness
of M/I Homes, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K of M/I Homes, Inc. for the year ended December
31, 2009.











/s/DELOITTE & TOUCHE
LLP






Columbus,
Ohio


February
24, 2010
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
132460 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 132460 COA: 261419 Macomb CC: 04-003901-FC DANNY THOMAS MARSILI, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 19, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0122 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 29, 2007

Clerk
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1118 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to remove the exclusion 

of Medicare coverage for hearing aids and examinations therefor, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 18, 2021 

Mrs. DINGELL (for herself, Mr. KILMER, Miss RICE of New York, Ms. 

SCHAKOWSKY, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Ms. KAPTUR, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. 

DOGGETT, and Mr. FITZPATRICK) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition 

to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently 

determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to remove 

the exclusion of Medicare coverage for hearing aids and 

examinations therefor, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Hearing Aid 

5 Coverage Act of 2021’’. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1118 IH

1 SEC. 2. REMOVING MEDICARE EXCLUSION OF COVERAGE 

2 OF HEARING AIDS AND EXAMINATIONS 

3 THEREFOR. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1862(a)(7) of the Social 

5 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)(7)) is amended by strik6 ing ‘‘hearing aids or examinations therefor,’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 this section shall apply to items and services furnished on 

9 or after January 1, 2022. 

10 SEC. 3. GAO STUDY AND REPORT ON HEARING AID PRO11 GRAMS. 

12 (a) STUDY.—The Comptroller General of the United 

13 States shall conduct a study of programs, including Fed14 eral programs and health insurance coverage, that provide 

15 assistance for hearing aids and related examinations for 

16 individuals with hearing loss. Such study shall include an 

17 examination of the number of individuals in the United 

18 States with hearing loss who need hearing aids, their cov19 erage under such programs, and the effectiveness of such 

20 programs in meeting such need. Such study may also ad21 dress programs that are designed to reduce or mitigate 

22 the incidence of hearing loss. 

23 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after the 

24 date specified in section 2(b), the Comptroller General 

25 shall submit a report to Congress on the study conducted 

26 under subsection (a). Such report shall include such recVerDate Sep 11 2014 16:07 Mar 13, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1118.IH H1118

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1118 IH

1 ommendations on changes in such programs, including the 

2 establishment of new programs, as would meet the needs 

3 of individuals with hearing loss. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS