alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.8



 Exhibit 10.8 

Loan Agreement 
 between

 Auris Medical AG 
 and

 Altamira Pharma GmbH 
 Altamira Pharma
GmbH, Zuchwil, and Auris Medical AG, Basel (the “Parties”), agree to enter into a loan agreement (“Agreement”) as follows: 
 Altamira
Pharma GmbH (“Lender”) is providing a revolving credit facility of up to CHF 250,000 and up to EUR 250,000 (“Loan Amount”) to Auris Medical AG (“Borrower”), starting January 11, 2013, for a maximum of 30 days at an
annual interest rate of 5%. Lender agrees to transfer Loan Amount upon request either as a whole or in tranches to Borrower’s bank account(s) and Borrower agrees to pay back Loan Amount as well as accrued interest on February 11, 2013 at
the latest to Lender’s bank account(s). 
  

											
	Basel,	 	 9.1.2013
	 		 	Zuchwil,	 	 08.01.2013

				
	Auris Medical AG	 		 		 	Altamira Pharma GmbH
			
	



	 	



	 	




	Oliver Kubli	 	Prof Wolfgang Arnold	 	Dr Thomas Meyer


  
 1/1
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

RYAN J. CONNELL, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-4168

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed March 21, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Pasco County; Susan G. Barthle, 

Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See §§ 775.082(9)(a)(1)(q), 810.02(3), Fla. Stat. (2012); Ch. 74-

383, § 66, at 1256, Laws of Fla.; State v. Dehart, 913 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).

LaROSE, C.J., and CASANUEVA and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
106

Section C: Recommended Funding Levels, by State

Nevada

Program Intervention Budgets: 2014

Recommended Annual Investment $30.0 million

Deaths in State Caused by Smoking

Annual average smoking-attributable deaths 4,100

Youth aged 0-17 projected to die from smoking 41,200

Annual Costs Incurred in State from Smoking

Total medical $1,080 million

State Revenue from Tobacco Sales and Settlement

FY 2012 tobacco tax revenue $102.4 million

FY 2012 tobacco settlement payment $40.3 million

Total state revenue from tobacco sales and settlement $142.7 million

Percent Tobacco Revenue to Fund at Recommended Level 21%

Annual Total (Millions) Annual Per Capita

Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended

I. State and Community Interventions 

Multiple social resources working together will 

have the greatest long-term population impact.

$8.3 $10.4 $3.01 $3.77

II. Mass-Reach Health Communication Interventions 

Media interventions work to prevent smoking initiation, 

promote cessation, and shape social norms.

$3.4 $4.9 $1.23 $1.78

III. Cessation Interventions 

Tobacco use treatment is effective and highly cost-effective. $6.8 $10.8 $2.46 $3.91

IV. Surveillance and Evaluation 

Publicly funded programs should be accountable and 

demonstrate effectiveness.

$1.9 $2.6 $0.67 $0.95

V. Infrastructure, Administration, and Management 

Complex, integrated programs require experienced 

staff to provide fiscal management, accountability, 

and coordination.

$0.9 $1.3 $0.34 $0.47

TOTAL $21.3 $30.0 $7.71 $10.88

Note: A justification for each program element and the rationale for the budget estimates are provided in Section A. The funding estimates presented are based on adjustments for changes in population and cost-of-living increases since Best Practices—2007 was published. The actual 

funding required for implementing programs will vary depending on state characteristics, such as prevalence of tobacco use, sociodemographic 

factors, and other factors. See Appendix E for data sources on deaths, costs, revenue, and state-specific factors. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Office on Smoking and Health

www.cdc.gov/tobacco • tobaccoinfo@cdc.gov • 1 (800) CDC-INFO or 1 (800) 232-4636 

2014
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18934]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Ethics Subcommittee and the Advisory Committee to the Director, 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Cancellation of Meetings

    This notice announces the cancellation of previously announced 
meetings.
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 63 FR 34901, June 
26, 1998.
PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIMES AND DATES: 9 a.m.-3 p.m., July 16, 1998, and 
8:30 a.m.-3 p.m. July 17, 1998.
CHANGE IN THE MEETING: These meetings have been cancelled.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Linda Kay McGowan, Executive 
Secretary, Advisory Committee to the Director, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, 
NE, M/S D-24, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone 404/639-7080.

    Dated: July 10, 1998.
Nancy C. Hirsch,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 98-18934 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6745

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL T. MCGEE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:13-cr-00023-FPS-JES-1)

Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 4, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael T. McGee, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hugh McWilliams, 

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, William J. Ihlenfeld, II, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael T. McGee appeals the district court’s order 

granting as framed his Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion to correct a 

clerical error in the transcript of his jury trial proceedings. 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. The 

court’s correction of the trial transcript is supported by other 

record documents. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v McGee, No. 5:13-cr00023-FPS-JES-1 (N.D. W. Va. May 11, 2016). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19012]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 070998A]


Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Ad Hoc 
Allocation Committee will hold a meeting which is open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will begin on Monday, August 3, at 10 a.m. and will 
continue through Tuesday, August 4, 1998, as necessary.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Pacific Fishery Management 
Council Office, 2130 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR.
     Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth 
Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR 97201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Walker, Fishery Management 
Analyst; telephone: (503) 326-6352.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the meeting is to prepare 
options for allocation of lingcod and bocaccio rockfish between the 
recreational and commercial fisheries and between gear sectors of the 
limited entry fleet. The committee will also discuss longer-term 
priorities for allocation of other rockfish species. In addition, the 
committee will discuss alternative groundfish management strategies, 
such as permit stacking, a shorter limited entry season, and species 
endorsements. The committee will prepare a report to present to the 
Council at its September meeting.
    Although other issues not contained in this agenda may come before 
this Committee for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the 
subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted 
those issues specifically identified in the agenda listed in this 
notice.

Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Mr. John Rhoton at (503) 326-6352 at least 5 days 
prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: July 10, 1998.
Gary C. Matlock,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 98-19012 Filed 7-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

1

DIC FDR/FDS FORMAT

REPLY TO REQUEST FOR SUMMARY LEVEL 

ADJUSTMENT AND

RESPONSE TO FOLLOW-UP ON REQUEST FOR 

SUMMARY LEVEL BILLING ADJUSTMENT

Field Legend Position(s) Entry and Instructions

DI Code 1-3 Enter

FDR to reply to an initial request.

FDS to reply to follow-up request.

RI Code 4-6 Perpetuate the billing office RI from the 

request (DI Code FDE, FDF).

Recipient of Billing 

Status Code

7 Perpetuate from the request.

Blank 8-10 Leave blank.

Bill Number 

(Duplicate)

11-15 Perpetuate from the request.

Blank 16-18 Leave blank.

Date (Duplicate Bill) 19-21 Perpetuate Year Within Decade and 

Month from the request.

Blank 22-24 Leave blank.

Bill Number 

(Original bill)

25-29 Perpetuate from the request.

Blank 30-32 Leave blank.

Date (Original bill) 33-35 Perpetuate Year Within Decade and 

Month from the request.

Amount (Original bill) 36-44 Perpetuate from the request.

DoDAAC (Requestor) 45-50 Perpetuate from the request.

Bill Number 

(Adjustment)

51-55 When the billing status code indicates 

adjustment furnished previously (e.g., AI 

or DD), enter the bill number under 

which the adjustment was processed. 

Otherwise, leave blank.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

2

Field Legend Position(s) Entry and Instructions

Year Within Decade 

and Month 

(Adjustment)

56-58 Enter the year within decade and the 

month in which the adjustment was 

processed when the billing status 

indicates adjustment was furnished 

previously. Otherwise, leave blank.

Billing Status Code 59-61 Enter:

59 Blank or character significant to the 

billing office.

60-61 Applicable status code.

Day of the Year 62-64 Enter day of year response is prepared. 

Must be forwarded within three calendar 

days of this day.

Amount (Duplicate) 65-73 Enter adjustment amount.

Blank 74-80 Leave blank.
No. 10-10623.

#### Berlie Daniels, Petitioner v. Florida.

565 U.S. 841, 132 S. Ct. 154,

181 L. Ed. 2d 69,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5987.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.

*70Same case below, 59 So. 3d 107.
The HONORABLE GEORGE HOWARD, JR., United States District Judge for 1

the Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-3058

___________

In re: Elmo McMillion, *

 *

Debtor, *

 *

---------------------- * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the

Elmo McMillion, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

 *

Appellant, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

v. *

 *

Riceland Foods, Inc.; Merlen Watson, *

 *

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: April 7, 1998

 Filed: April 15, 1998

___________

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Elmo McMillion appeals from the district court&s order dismissing his

1

bankruptcy appeal for failure to prosecute. After careful review of the record, we
-2-

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny all

pending motions.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
No. 11-5275.

#### Betty J. Murray, Petitioner v. Don Ingram.

565 U.S. 899, 132 S. Ct. 290,

181 L. Ed. 2d 175,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5542.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 7, April 24, 2012

**C2. CHAPTER 2**

**SHIPMENT NOTIFICATION**

C2.1.  GENERAL.  This chapter prescribes standard procedures to report the shipment of supplies by vendors to the Department of Defense.  These reports are either generated online in Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) or transmitted to WAWF using the 856, Advance Shipment Notice (ASN).  The ASN provides an electronic receiving report to designated recipients to enable electronic processing of the receipt and acceptance of supplies.  The ASN replaces the functionality of the DD Form 250, Material Inspection and Receiving Report.

C2.2.  PROCEDURES.  

	C2.2.1.  The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), Subpart 232.70, Electronic Submission and Processing Payment Requests and Receiving Reports, prescribes policies and procedures for submitting and processing receiving reports in electronic form.

	C2.2.2.  DFARS Appendix F, Part 3, Preparation of the Wide Area Workflow Receiving Report, prescribes instructions for the preparation of the receiving report.

	C2.2.3.  The WAWF Electronic Data Interchange Implementation Guides on the WAWF Website define the structure and associated business rules for generating and transmitting the 856 ASN.

1

C2-1

CHAPTER 2
No. 10-11252.

#### Jose Espino-Rangel, Petitioner v. Lisa J. W. Hollingsworth, Warden.

565 U.S. 875, 132 S. Ct. 234,

181 L. Ed. 2d 132,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7044.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19186]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-347-000]


Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

July 14, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 9, 1998, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company 
(Eastern Shore) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets, with 
a proposed effective date of August 1, 1998:

Second Revised Sheet No. 141
Second Revised Sheet No. 143
Second Revised Sheet No. 160A
Second Revised Sheet No. 210

    Eastern Shore states that the filing is being made pursuant to the 
Commission's Order issued April 16, 1998 in Docket No. 96-1-007 (Order 
No. 587-G) Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas 
Pipelines, Eastern Shore tenders for filing the above listed tariff 
sheets adopting Version 1.2 as the current GISB standards.
    Eastern Shore states that copies of its filing has been mailed to 
all firm customers, interruptible customers, and affected state 
commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington D.C. 20426, 
in accordance wit the Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the public 
Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-19186 Filed 7-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
**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**

| (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 results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                        |                                                                    | **Metwood,                Inc.**                          |
|---------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                        |                                                                    |                                                      |
| Date: September                7, 2007 | By:                                                           | /s/ Robert                M.                Callahan |
|                                        | Robert                M. CallahanChief                Executive Officer |
No. 11-5421.

#### Diarre Hamilton, Petitioner v. Andrew Jackson, Warden.

565 U.S. 906, 132 S. Ct. 309,

181 L. Ed. 2d 189,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5810.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 416 Fed. Appx. 501.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       4,662,180
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,048,928
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     22,404
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,743,112
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             100,906,012
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,038,960
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,165
<OTHER-SE>                                  96,867,053
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               100,906,012
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,388,354
<CGS>                                        1,895,933
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,971,775
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (29,366)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,415,310
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58



</TABLE>
# C_2013123EN.01003002.xml

| 27.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 123/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/30

---

Action brought on 19 February 2013 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-19/13)

2013/C 123/54

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for the annulment of the decision to calculate accredited pension rights acquired before entry into service on the basis of the new General Implementing Provisions.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 2 July 2012 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant before his entry into service with the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 2 July 2012 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant before his entry into service with the Commission;

| — | in so far as necessary, annul the decision of 7 December 2012 rejecting his complaint requesting application of the General Implementing Provisions and the actuarial rates in force at the time of his request to transfer his pension rights; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as necessary, annul the decision of 7 December 2012 rejecting his complaint requesting application of the General Implementing Provisions and the actuarial rates in force at the time of his request to transfer his pension rights;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
No. 10-7957.

#### Guillermo Chavez-Rodriguez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1192, 131 S. Ct. 1029,

178 L. Ed. 2d 851,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 662.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.