alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.23


 



Sport Endurance, Inc.


222 Broadway, 19th Floor


New York, NY 10038












August 17, 2017

















Re:          Sport Endurance, Inc. / Forbearance on Senior Secured Promissory Notes







Dear Sirs:







This letter agreement (the “Agreement”) acknowledges that in exchange for Sport Endurance, Inc. (the “Company”) paying ____________ $10 and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged, ____________ extends the due date of  the 10% Senior Secured Promissory Note (the “Senior Note”), to and including 5:00 pm on December 27, 2017, the “Due Date”).







Without modifying or amending the terms of the Senior Note, the Security Agreement or the Purchase Agreement, __________ agrees to forebear and not to seek collection against the Company of any amounts due under the Senior Note, Security Agreement or Purchase Agreement through and until the Due Date. The period of forbearance provided in this Agreement shall terminate on the Due Date if the amount due under the Senior Note is not paid within that period.







Except as modified by this Agreement, the Company hereby ratifies and confirms the terms and provisions of the Senior Note, the Security Agreement and the Purchase Agreement. The Senior Note, Security Agreement, Purchase Agreement and all other agreements, instruments and other documents executed in connection with the obligations of the Company under the Senior Note are legal, valid, binding and enforceable against the Company in accordance with their terms.







Any number of counterparts of this Agreement may be signed and delivered, each of which shall be considered an original and all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.







Please sign below evidencing your agreement to be bound by this Agreement and return to us.





















Very truly yours,












_________________________


David Lelong


President and CEO






















We hereby agree to the foregoing:







By:          












Title:
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

fandc99@aol.com 

Thursday, November 28, 2013 9:44 PM 

Faulk, Scott (OST) 

EAS KALAUPAPA 

Dear Department of Transportation 

I am writing to urge you to support and approve Molulele Airline's bid to link Kalaupapa to Kahului, Honolulu, Kapalua and 

Ho'olehua. Mokulele has been real source of low fares and reliability for Topside Moloka'i. Frequent service to our 

community to and from important appointments, family visits, and shopping trips to Honolulu, Kahului, Maui and most 

recently to Kapalua and Waimea on the Big Island. Those of us who live on Moloka'i would be lost without Mokulele 

Airlines providing services to all of these destinations. They have shown over and over again that they are invested in 

our Community. Their agents and staff are like family to many of on the island. When a plane arrives at Ho'olehua, these 

people are on it! Fast, friendly and we are on our way quickly. Their on time record is by far the best around. When 

everyone else is showing delays and cancellations, Mokulele is flying. 

Please select Mokulele to serve Kalaupapa for the next 4 years. They have proven that they will not let the citizens of 

Topside Moloka'i or Kalaupapa down. Further, they are the only airline that open Kalaupapa to other Communities on 

Maui, Oahu and The Big Island of Hawaii. 

Frank Parrino 

35 Ka'ana 

Maunaloa, Moloka'i 

HI 96770 

808 658-04 7 4 

1
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 Exhibit 10.8(b)


                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

                       APPLIED GRAPHICS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

                        1998 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN



                           WHEREAS, Applied Graphics Technologies, Inc., a
         Delaware corporation (the "Company"), adopted the Applied Graphics
         Technologies, Inc. 1998 Incentive Compensation Plan (the "Plan")
         effective as of May 27, 1998;

                           WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to
         specify the number and vesting of Options that may be granted to
         Non-Employee Directors; and

                           WHEREAS, Section 16.2 of the Plan provides that, in
         certain circumstances, the Board may amend the plan at any time;

                           NOW, THEREFORE, the plan is hereby amended effective
         as of May 27, 1998 as follows:

                           1.       A new Section 7.9 is added to the Plan to
                                    read as follows:

                                            7.9 Grants to Non-Employee
                                    Directors. Upon being elected a Director,
                                    each Non-Employee Director shall be granted
                                    a Non-Qualified Stock Option to purchase
                                    25,000 (twenty-five thousand) shares of
                                    Common Stock, which Stock Option shall be
                                    50% (fifty percent) Vested on the first
                                    anniversary date of the date of grant of
                                    such Stock Option and shall be 100% (one
                                    hundred percent) Vested on the second
                                    anniversary date of the date of grant of
                                    such Stock Option. In addition, on each
                                    anniversary date of the Non-Employee
                                    Director's commencement of service as a
                                    Director, the Non-Employee Director will be
                                    granted a Non-Qualified Stock Option to
                                    purchase 5,000 (five thousand) shares of
                                    Common Stock, provided that he or she
                                    continues to serve as a Director on such
                                    date, which Stock Option shall immediately
                                    vest on the respective date of such grant.

                           2.       In all other respects, the Plan is hereby
                                    ratified and confirmed.

                           3.       Capitalized terms used herein but not
                                    otherwise defined herein shall have the
                                    meanings set forth in the Plan.
# Official Journal C 184/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.184.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 184 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5628 June 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.184.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 184

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5628 June 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 184/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 May 2013 to 31 May 2013(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  ) | 1 |
| 2013/C 184/02 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 May 2013 to 31 May 2013(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC
  or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC
  ) | 10 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 184/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 May 2013 to 31 May 2013(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  )

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council

)

1

2013/C 184/02

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 May 2013 to 31 May 2013(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC
  or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC
  )

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC

or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC

)

10

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### DONGHU LI, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-73163

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 20, 2017

Donghu Li, Pro Se

OIL, Christina P. Greer, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision- without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Donghu Li, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. *Shrestha v. Holder,*590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

*482Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on Li’s inconsistent testimony as to his baptism. *See id.*at 1048 (adverse credibility determination supported under the totality of the circumstances). Li’s explanation for the inconsistency does not compel a contrary result. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, in this case, Li’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Li’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to China. *See id.*at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 pys disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of AmREIT Monthly Income &
Growth Fund IV, L.P. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, H. Kerr Taylor, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my
capacity as an officer of the General Partner of the Company, that, to my
knowledge:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                     
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, 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
Company.

|      |  |                |       |                                                                                                                                                            
|----- |  | -------------- | ----- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: |  | March 10,
2010 | By:   | /s/ H. Kerr Taylor                                                                                                                                         
|      |  |                | Name: | H. Kerr Taylor                                                                                                                                             
|      |  |                | Title | President and Chief Executive Officer of AmREIT Monthly Income & Growth IV Corporation, the General Partner
of AmREIT Monthly Income & Growth Fund IV, L.P.

---
#### Jonathan WATKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. I. BACA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-15410

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 15, 2017 *

Filed November 21, 2017

*611Jonathan Watkins, Pro Se

D. Randall Gilmer, Deputy Attorney General, AGNV — Office of the Nevada Attorney General (Las Vegas), Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Jonathan Watkins, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a First Amendment claim related to the handling of his outgoing mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *O’Keefe v. Van Boening,*82 F.3d 322, 324 (9th Cir. 1996). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Watkins failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Baca permitted by regulation more than a “cursory visual inspection” of outgoing legal mail, *Nordstrom v. Ryan,*856 F.3d 1265, 1272 (9th Cir. 2017), or otherwise knowingly tolerated a violation of Watkins’s First Amendment rights, *See Witherow v. Paff,*52 F.3d 264, 265-66 (9th Cir. 1995) (describing prisoners’ First Amendment right to send and receive mail); *see also Crowley v. Bannister,*734 F.3d 967, 977 (9th Cir. 2013) (supervisors can only be liable under § 1983 if they are personally involved in a constitutional deprivation or if they implement a constitutionally deficient policy).

We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. *See United States v. Elias,*921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
# C_2005143EN.01002905.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/29

---

Removal from the register of Case C-49/04 (1)

1

(2005/C 143/50)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

By order of 23 February 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-49/04 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands.

---

(1)  OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

1

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Crisoforo PALENCIA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-40418 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 14, 2018

*246Tracey M. Batson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Orisoforo Palencia, Pro Se

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Orisoforo Palencia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F,3d 229 (6th Cir. 2011). Palencia has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*6th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cm. R. 47.5.4.
#### Steven E. BROWN, Claimant-Appellant v. David J. SHULKIN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee

2017-1006

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

December 13, 2017

Kenneth M. Carpenter, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant.

Adam E. Lyons, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, ar*682gued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by Chad A. Readler, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Elizabeth M. Hosford; Brian D. Griffin, Jonathan Krisch, Office of General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.

(Prost, Chief Judge, Moore and Reyna, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordeked and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 41234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17647]

[[Page 41234]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science.

ACTION: Notice of renewal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), and in accordance with Title 41 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations, Section 102-3.65(a), and following 
consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, General 
Services Administration, notice is hereby given that the Advanced 
Scientific Computing Advisory Committee will be renewed for a two-year 
period beginning July 1, 2011. The Committee provides advice and 
recommendations concerning the Advanced Scientific Computing program in 
response only to charges from the Director of the Office of Science, 
except as described:

--Periodic reviews of elements of Advanced Scientific Computing 
Research program and recommendations based thereon;
--Advice on the computing long-range plans, priorities, and strategies 
to address more effectively the scientific aspects of advanced 
scientific computing including the relationship of advanced scientific 
computing to other scientific disciplines;
--Advice on appropriate levels and sector allocation of funding to 
develop those plans, priorities, and strategies and to help maintain 
appropriate balance among elements of the program; and
--Advice on national policy and scientific issues related to advanced 
scientific computing that are of concern to the Department of Energy as 
requested by the Secretary or the Under Secretary for Science.

    Additionally, the renewal of the Advanced Scientific Computing 
Advisory Committee has been determined to be essential to conduct 
Department of Energy business and to be in the public interest in 
connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Department 
of Energy by law and agreement. The Committee will operate in 
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 
and rules and regulations issued in implementation of that Act.
    Further information regarding this Advisory Committee may be 
obtained from Mrs. Christine Chalk at (301) 903-5152.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on July 1, 2011.
Carol A. Matthews,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-17647 Filed 7-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
#### IN RE MOENISHA B. ET AL.*

(AC 20977)

Landau, Mihalakos and Daly, Js.

Argued March 19

officially released May 8, 2001

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed.
United States Steel Corporation – Keetac

Response to U. S. EPA Section 114 Request

April 24, 2012

Item 2

For the time period January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011, provide manufacturing

specifications and operating data to demonstrate operating parameters for each of the

facility's indurating furnaces. Operating parameters and data must include, at a

minimum: flue gas composition, entrance air temperature, exit air temperature,

preheat zone temperature, burner temperature, pellet residence time, and air flow rate.

Person(s): that provided information used or considered in responding to the question or 

were consulted in the preparation of the response: Kraig Raiber, Stephani Campbell

Answer:

Flue gas composition is not a parameter that is monitored, with the exception of information 

collected by the CEMS for the respective lines. Therefore, no information related to this item 

has been included.

The entrance air for all lines is ambient air, therefore no temperature is provided.

Air flow rate for the individual lines is dependent on a number of operating factors and is 

monitored continually by the CEMS. This information is provided in hourly detail in the 

response to Item 12.

The operating parameter information provided below is typical during the timeframe specified. 

It represents typical operation of the equipment, not manufacturer’s specifications. 

Keetac Induration Operating Parameters

Kiln Exit Air Temp 2100°F

Preheat furnace Temp 2100°F

Kiln BZ Temp 2460°F

WG Airflow rate 610,000 scfm

Grate Residence Time 6 min

Kiln Residence Time ~20 min (estimated value)

Cooler Residence Time 20 min

Combustion Air Entrance Temp NA (don't have combustion air fans at Keetac)