alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT TO STOCK PURCHASE AGREEEMENT



         Effective June 1, 2000, the stock purchase agreement, dated as of March
10,  2000  between   Intellicall,   Inc.   ("Seller")  and  Gotthardfin  Limited
("Purchaser") is amended to read as follows:

                  Further Agreements.
                  ------------------

                  (c) During  the  period  commencing  on the  Closing  Date and
ending on the one-year  anniversary  of the Closing Date (the "Option  Period"),
Purchaser  hereby grants to Seller an option (the "Option") to repurchase all or
any part of the Shares for a purchase  price of U.S. $250 per share  (subject to
appropriate  adjustment for any stock split,  stock dividends or the like).  The
Option may be  exercised  by Seller by  delivery  of written  note to  Purchaser
indicating the number of Shares to be repurchased and the date to be repurchased
(which  date may be no later than thirty  (30) days  following  the date of such
written  notice).  The repurchase  price shall be paid in immediately  available
funds,  unless otherwise agreed to by Purchaser.  The Option shall be assignable
by Seller upon written notice to Purchaser.

                  (d)  Upon an offer  from a third  party  to  purchase  the ILD
shares,  the Purchaser grants the Seller the right of first refusal to match the
offer presented by the third party within 24 hours of receipt of such offer.

         EXECUTED as of the date first set forth above.

                                            GOTTHARDFIN LIMITED


                                            -----------------------------
                                            By: /s/ Nicola Mordasini

                   Title: Vice-Chairman of the Executive Board


                                            -----------------------------
                                            By: /s/ Gabriele Zanetti

                                            Title: Member of Management


                                            INTELLICALL, INC.

                                            ------------------------------
                                            By: /s/ R. Phillip Boyd

                                            Title: CFO


                                      -25-
<PAGE>
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   06-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            44,943
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                           14,733
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                             15,262
<EQUITIES>                                       8,667
<MORTGAGE>                                          93
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  75,746
<CASH>                                             223
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               2,286
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           4,361
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 131,172
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 54,186
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             24,868
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                            2,306
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                  5,922
<COMMON>                                            47
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,859
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   131,172
<PREMIUMS>                                      22,109
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              2,161
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 540
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     215
<BENEFITS>                                      22,141
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      3,991
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             3,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,476) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,581) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,895)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.67)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                  48,964
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             17,039 
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                5,101
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                               6,174
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                10,018
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                 54,186
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### IN RE: Sarkis ANTABIAN, Debtor, Sarkis Antabian, Appellant, v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Appellee.

No. 17-60002

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 6, 2018 * Pasadena, California

Filed February 8, 2018

Jayne T. Kaplan, Esquire, Jayne T. Kaplan, Pasadena, CA, for Appellant

J. Alexandra Rhim, Attorney, Hemar, Rousso & Heald LLP, Encino, CA, for Appellee

Before: CALLAHAN and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and PRATT,** District Judge.

*

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

**

**The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Sarkis Antabian appeals a judgment by the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”), which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of Antabian’s adversary complaint against Wells Fargo *779Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) and .affirm.

1. We agree with Antabian and the BAP that the sale of the subject property during the pendency of Antabian’s appeal to the BAP does not render the case moot. As the BAP pointed out, “the foreclosure sale generated cash proceeds, which were paid to Wells Fargo,” and “[t]he issue of Wells Fargo’s entitlement to those proceeds remains a live controversy.”

2. We “review[ ] decisions of the BAP de novo and appl[y] the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling.” *In re Deitz,*760 F.3d 1038, 1039 (9th Cir. 2014) (order). We review a dismissal under Rule 41(b) for abuse of discretion. *In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prod. Liab. Litig.,*460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc). Although dismissal is a harsh penalty, “we will overturn a dismissal sanction only if we have a definite and firm conviction that it was clearly outside the acceptable range of sanctions.” *Id.*(quoting *Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv.,*833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987)).

The bankruptcy court applied the correct legal standard under Rule 41(b). *See In re Phenylpropanolamine,*460 F.3d at 1226 (discussing factors a court should consider in determining whether to dismiss under Rule 41(b)). The bankruptcy court made explicit findings as to each of the essential factors, concluding that four of the five factors weighed in favor of dismissal. The court’s analysis of the relevant factors is reasonable and supported by the record. Although the facts do not compel dismissal, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in electing to do so.2

AFFIRMED.

***

 disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Antabian also appealed from a separate, but identical BAP judgment. The other case, No. 17-60001, is resolved by a separate memorandum disposition.

2

. Because Wells Fargo’s motion to dismiss and the bankruptcy court's order were based on Rule 41(b), we reject Antabian’s argument that the dismissal of his adversary complaint is governed by Rule 37, instead of Rule 41(b).
# C_2022128EN.01003102.xml

| 21.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 128/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/31

---

Action brought on 2 February 2022 — PS v EIB

(Case T-65/22)

(2022/C 128/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: PS (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 12 July 2021 rejecting the applicant’s claim lodged on 21 May 2021; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 12 July 2021 rejecting the applicant’s claim lodged on 21 May 2021;

| — | order the European Investment Bank to pay the applicant the allowance referred to in Article 11 of the AXA insurance policy, for permanent invalidity, at the maximum rate, as well as the benefits provided for in Article 9.1.13 of the Staff Rules, in addition to the sum of EUR 24 000 for the non-material damage caused; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Investment Bank to pay the applicant the allowance referred to in Article 11 of the AXA insurance policy, for permanent invalidity, at the maximum rate, as well as the benefits provided for in Article 9.1.13 of the Staff Rules, in addition to the sum of EUR 24 000 for the non-material damage caused;

| — | order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the EIB’s decision of 12 July 2021 rejecting the applicant’s claim for damages lodged on 21 May 2021, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of the fundamental right to effective social security for workers under Articles 31(1) and 34(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 12 of the European Social Charter. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of the fundamental right to effective social security for workers under Articles 31(1) and 34(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 12 of the European Social Charter.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to good administration and the right to have affairs handled within a reasonable time, and failure on the part of the EIB to discharge its duty of care. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to good administration and the right to have affairs handled within a reasonable time, and failure on the part of the EIB to discharge its duty of care.

---
EX-10.58





 Certain identified information has been excluded from this exhibit because it is both not material and
is the type that the registrant treats as private or confidential. Information that was omitted has been noted in this document with a placeholder identified by the mark “[***]”. 

Exhibit 10.58 
 MUTUAL
TERMINATION OF THE 
 [***] SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD AGREEMENT 

This Mutual Termination of the [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement (“Mutual Termination”) is entered into as of March 17,
2018, and is by and between Caribou Biosciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Company”), and Jennifer A. Doudna, an individual (“Advisor”) (each herein referred to individually as a “Party,” or collectively as the
“Parties”). Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement. 

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to mutually terminate the [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement by and between Company and Advisor as
set forth herein; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements contained in this Mutual Termination, and other good
and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 
  

	 	1.	 The [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement, by and between Caribou and Advisor dated January 1, 2017,
is terminated effective March 31, 2018 (“Effective Termination Date”). Company will pay Advisor a final payment of thirty-one thousand, two hundred fifty U.S. dollars ($31,250) on or before the
Effective Termination Date, and no further monies shall be owed under the [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement. 


  

	 	2.	 The Parties acknowledge and ratify the survival provisions set forth in Section 5(E) of the [***]
Scientific Advisory Board Agreement. 


  

	 	3.	 Nothing in this Mutual Termination shall effect the Scientific Advisory Board Agreement between the Parties,
dated June 18, 2012, as amended. 


 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Mutual
Termination of the [***] Scientific Advisory Board Agreement. 
  

									
	Caribou Biosciences, Inc.	 		 	Jennifer A. Doudna
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Rachel E. Haurwitz
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Jennifer A. Doudna

		 	Rachel E. Haurwitz, Ph.D.	 		 		 	
		 	President & Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000819577
<NAME> AEI REAL ESTATE FUND XVII LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,880,840
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      357
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,881,197
<PP&E>                                      11,757,594
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,524,969)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,113,822
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          391,493
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,722,329
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,113,822
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               368,885
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  170,163
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                198,722
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            198,722
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   198,722
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     8.58
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.19

                                 TERMINATION OF
             ASSIGNMENT OF DRILLING CONTRACT REVENUES AND EARNINGS

        THIS  AGREEMENT dated  as of  November 29,  1995, among  Reading and
  Bates  Borneo Drilling  Co., Ltd.,  a corporation  organized and  existing
  under the laws of the  State of Oklahoma ("Assignor") and Bank One, Texas,
  N.A., a national banking association, as Trustee (the "Assignee").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

        WHEREAS,  pursuant  to  that Amended  and  Restated Credit  Facility
  Agreement  dated  April  27,   1995,  as  amended  (the  "Restated  Credit
  Agreement") among the Borrowers (as defined therein)  (including Assignor)
  and Internationale Nederlanden Bank, N.V. (the "Lender") the Lender agreed
  to provide funding  to the Borrowers in the aggregate principal  amount of
  up to $65,000,000; and

        WHEREAS, the  Assignor, as security  for its  obligations under  the
  Restated  Credit  Agreement, entered  into  that  Assignment  of  Drilling
  Contract Revenues and Earnings dated April 27, 1995 (as amended, from time
  to time, the "Assignment");

        WHEREAS, the Borrowers  and the Lender have agreed to  terminate the
  Restated Credit Agreement  and for Lender to release all  collateral given
  in  security  for  the   obligations  of  the  Borrowers,  including  this
  Assignment, as follows.

        NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and for  other
  good and valuable  consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of  which is
  hereby acknowledged, the Assignee, upon instructions of the Lender, agrees
  to terminate and release the Assignment, effective as of the  date hereof,
  as follows.

        1.    The Assignment is terminated, effective as of the date hereof,
              and the  Assignor is  released from  any  and all  obligations
              thereunder.

        2.    The Trustee agrees to execute and deliver to the Assignor  any
              and  all  UCC-3  Termination  Statements  for  filing  in  all
              relevant jurisdictions.   

        All capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein shall  have
  the meanings given to them in the Assignment.

  THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE  GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED  IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
  INTERNAL LAWS OF  THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND  MAY NOT BE AMENDED OR CHANGED
  EXCEPT BY AN INSTRUMENT IN WRITING.

        IN  WITNESS WHEREOF,  the parties  hereto  have  duly executed  this
  Termination Agreement on the date first written above.

                                READING AND BATES BORNEO DRILLING CO., LTD.

                                By: ___________________________
                                    Name:  ____________________
                                    Title: ____________________

                                BANK ONE, TEXAS, N.A., as Trustee

                                By:  __________________________
                                     Name:  ___________________
                                     Title: ___________________
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6423]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 93-165; RM-8247]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Athens, OH

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration; application for 
review.

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

SUMMARY: This document dismisses an Application for Review filed by 
David A. Ringer directed to an earlier Memorandum Opinion and Order 
which denied a petition for reconsideration in the proceeding relating 
to the establishment of a filing window for the filing of applications 
for authorization to operate on Channel 240A in Athens, Ohio. See 60 FR 
53878, published October 18, 1995. With this action, the proceeding is 
terminated.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hayne, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2177.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Memorandum Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. 93-165, adopted February 
26, 1997, and released March 7, 1997. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, 
NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, 
Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.

Federal Communications Commission.
Douglas W. Webbink,
Chief, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-6423 Filed 3-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             116
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,106,267
<ALLOWANCES>                                   175,000
<INVENTORY>                                 11,984,190
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            24,110,141
<PP&E>                                      21,765,133
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,650,936
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              47,475,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,488,061
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        91,969
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,870,581
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                47,475,222
<SALES>                                     23,470,983
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            23,470,983
<CGS>                                       14,940,861
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,769,917
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             613,639
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,161,554
<INCOME-TAX>                                   240,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,401,554
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,401,554
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15


</TABLE>