alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10_4.htm




Exhibit 10.4


 


AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT







WHEREAS, Sontra Medical Corporation, a Minnesota corporation and the predecessor in interest to Echo Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Company”), and Harry Mitchell (“Executive”) entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of September 14, 2007; and







WHEREAS, Section 1.2(a) of the Agreement states that Executive shall serve as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Company and Executive has served in those roles since September 14, 2007; and







WHEREAS, Company and Executive have determined that, at this critical stage in Company’s product development and growth, it is necessary to separate the functions of Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer that are being performed by Executive; and







WHEREAS, Company and Executive have agreed that Executive shall focus on his role as Chief Operating Officer, leveraging his time to bring the Prelude SkinPrep System and Symphony tCGM System to market, as well as broaden the Company’s product pipeline.







 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as set forth below effective as of May 16, 2011:







1.           The first sentence of Section 1.2(a) of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:  “Executive shall serve as Chief Operating Officer of Company.”

 


2.           Due to the growth of Company and the resulting significant increase in Executive’s duties as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer since September 14, 2007, Executive shall focus his duties on his expanding role as Chief Operating Officer with his primary location in the Company’s Franklin, Massachusetts facility. The parties agree that this Amendment does not constitute a reduction in Executive’s duties or his authority as an Executive Officer of the Company.







3.           Except as specifically modified above, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment of Employment Agreement as of May 13, 2011.


 



	 ECHO THERAPEUTICS, INC	 
	 	 
	By: 	/s/ Patrick T. Mooney	 
	 	Patrick T. Mooney	 
	 	Chief Executive Officer	 
	 	 	 
	 	/s/ Harry G. Mitchell	 
	 	Harry G. Mitchell
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6984

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOE LEWIS BLACKWELL, JR., Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CR-96-109, CA-99-370-1) Submitted: September 21, 2000 Decided: September 29, 2000 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joe Lewis Blackwell, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Clifton Thomas Barrett, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on May 16, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on May 17, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Joe Lewis Blackwell, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and findno reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Blackwell , Nos. CR-96-109; CA-99-370-1 (M.D.N.C. May 17, 2000). * We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      9

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1


<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Mar-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-2000
<CASH>                                        249,585
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      2,575,475
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                              600,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         18,744
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           18,744
<LOANS>                                     6,237,219
<ALLOWANCE>                                   351,305
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              9,739,196
<DEPOSITS>                                  8,107,618
<SHORT-TERM>                                        0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            52,751
<LONG-TERM>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          760
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,528,555
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              9,739,196
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               169,695
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 421
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               48,547
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              218,662
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             62,399
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             62,399
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         156,263
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                59,337
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                44,351
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     44,351
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   44,351
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      58
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    952
<LOANS-NON>                                   279,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                        0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                               669,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              351,305
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       0
<RECOVERIES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             351,305
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           20,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                       331,305





</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3049-3050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-870]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Member Conflict Review, Program Announcement (PA) 
07-318

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting:

    Time and Date: 1 p.m.-3 p.m., March 5, 2009 (Closed).
    Place: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 
(NIOSH), CDC, 1095 Willowdale Road, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506, 
telephone: (304) 285-6143.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance 
with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis 
and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will include the review, 
discussion, and evaluation of ``Member Conflict Review, PA 07-318.''
    Contact Person for More Information: Chris Langub, PhD, 
Scientific Review Official, NIOSH, CDC, 2400 Century Center, 
Atlanta, GA 30333, telephone: (404) 498-2543.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.


[[Page 3050]]


    Dated: January 9, 2009.
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. E9-870 Filed 1-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
<PAGE>

                            [JUPITERS LIMITED LOGO]

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
             JUPITERS LIMITED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

<PAGE>

                            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 Jupiters Limited for the period ending
June 30, 2003, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof under cover of Form 20-F (the "Report"), I, Laurence M. Carsley, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.       The Report fully complies with the applicable 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.

Date:  October 24, 2003

-----------------------
Laurence M. Carsley
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Alliance HealthCard, Inc.,
certifies that the Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2003, which accompanies this certification fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Alliance HealthCard, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made solely for
purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code and is subject to the knowledge and willfulness qualifications contained in Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350(c).



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/    RITA MCKEOWN                 
|                                    
|Rita McKeown Chief Financial Officer



Date: January 9, 2004
----

----

|   | (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      at the date and for the periodsindicated. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: February      22, 2008 |   |   | /s/      Tang Chien Chang              |
|------------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                               |   |   | Tang      Chien ChangChief      Executive Officer (Principal Executive  Officer)                        |
NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_______________ No s . 2 2

- 1056 & 22

- 1057

_______________ IN RE: JOHN MICHAEL WALSH; ROSEMARY JOANNE WALSH, Debtors/Appellants

_______________ CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY

v. ROSEMARY JOANNE WALSH

_______________ FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY

v. ROSEMARY JOANNE WALSH; JOHN MICHAEL WALSH

_______________ On A ppeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. No s . 2 : 20

- cv - 20220 & 2:20

- cv - 20215 ) District Judge: Honorable Brian R. Martinotti

_______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)

on April 25 , 202 3 Before: KRAUSE, BIBAS, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges

(Filed: April 28, 2023 )2 _______________ OPINION *

_______________ BIBAS, Circuit Judge

. John and Rosemary Walsh filed jointly for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company and Chicago Title Insurance Company then filed adversary proceedings against them. Th e bankruptcy court struck the Walshes’ answers and entered default judgments for both Fidelity and Chicago on November 19, 2020. Fourteen days later, the Walshes moved for more time to file their notices of appeal. On December 22, thirty

three days after e ntry of the judgment

— well past the fourteen

- day deadline to appeal

— they filed their notices of appeal. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1)

. Almost a month later, the bankruptcy court denied their motions to extend time. The Walshes never appeal ed the denial of th ose extension motion s . If they had done so, we could have considered whether they had good reason for their delay. Instead, after tha t denial , they moved the District Court for more time to file their notices of appeal , regurgitating the extension motions they had made below . The District Court denied those motions, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to extend the time to appeal

. It wa s right . Under our precedent, the fourteen

- day deadline to appeal a bankruptcy

- court judgment is jurisdictional. In re Caterbone , 640 F.3d 108, 112 (3d Cir. 2011). The Walshes try to distinguish Caterbone because they had moved for extensions, but that dis tinction

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and, under I.O.P. 5.7, is not binding precedent.3

makes no difference. They do not ask us to reconsider Caterbone , so we decline to do so. Cf. In re Tennial , 978 F.3d 1022, 1024 (6th Cir. 2020) (Sutton, J.) . In any event, the Walshes offer no good reason for failing to appeal within fourteen days and failing to appeal the denial of their extension motions

. We th us affirm the District Court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
David,

Question 1 - The typical range over the last year has been 2.0% 

to 2.3%

Question 2 - The highest over the last 10 years has been 2.87%

Question 3 - The lowest sulfur content that we believe that we 

can consistently obtain over the next 10 years is difficult to 

answer. It is becoming more difficult and more expensive to 

obtain low sulfur coke. We have experienced a 60% increase per 

ton of coke from 2009 to 2011 with a premium being paid for low 

sulfur.

Noranda recently went through a PSD to increase production at 

our facility to 650 million pounds/year and have a maximum 

sulfur content in coke of 3.0% with an annual cap on SO2 

emissions at 6,072 tons/year. In order to actually achieve the 

650 million pounds/yr of aluminum production and staying below 

the annual cap, our sulfur in coke would need to be at 2.26% or 

less. If the sulfur in the coke was consistently at 2.5%, we 

would only be able to produce 598 million pounds/yr of aluminum 

while staying under the annual SO2 emissions cap.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Regards,

Jeff Kisner

Director, EHS

Noranda (NYSE: NOR)

office: 573.643.6919

cell: 573.225.2743

email: kisnerj@noralnm.com

website: http://www.norandaaluminum.com
Summary of Executive Officer and Non-employee Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.9 
 Summary of Executive Officer and Non-employee Director Compensation 
 Set forth below is a
summary of the compensation paid by Dril-Quip, Inc. (the “Company”) to its executive officers and non-employee directors as of the date of filing of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. For more information regarding executive
officer and director compensation, please read “Director Compensation,” “Executive Compensation,” and “Corporate Governance Matters—Related Person Transactions—Employment Agreements” contained in the
Company’s proxy statement for its 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A. 
 Executive
Officers 
 Each of the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Vice
President—Finance and Chief Financial Officer and Vice President—General Counsel and Secretary (each, an “Executive Officer”) is compensated in accordance with his employment agreement, each of which is filed as an Exhibit to the
Company’s Form 8-K/A filed December 12, 2011 and is incorporated by reference herein. 
 In addition, the Executive Officers are
eligible to receive a performance bonus for 2012 performance. The bonus award will be calculated based on (i) the Company’s performance in the 12-month period ending December 31, 2012 against target performance, (ii) the
Executive Officer’s achievement of personal objectives and (iii) the bonus target amounts for each Executive Officer which are set by the Nominating, Governance and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. 

Non-Employee Directors 
 The non-employee
Chairman of the Board receives an annual fee of $150,000 and the Company’s other non-employee directors receive an annual fee of $75,000. In addition, the non-employee Chairman of the Board and the other non-employee directors receive a fee of
$1,000 for attendance at each Board of Directors meeting and $1,000 for each committee meeting. All directors are reimbursed for their out-of-pocket expenses and other expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Board or its committees and for
other expenses incurred in their capacity as directors.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3259 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3259

                 For the relief of Dr. Shakeel Afridi.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 4, 2012

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 For the relief of Dr. Shakeel Afridi.

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

SECTION 1. NATURALIZATION FOR DR. SHAKEEL AFRIDI.

    Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 
or any other provision of law relating to naturalization, Dr. Shakeel 
Afridi is deemed to be a naturalized citizen of the United States as of 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                     [HORSESHOE GAMING HOLDING CORP. LOGO]

Exhibit 99.1


March 20, 2002


SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549

Dear Sir/ Madam:

Horseshoe Gaming Holding Corp. has received representation from Arthur Andersen
that the audit of Horseshoe Gaming Holding Corp. was subject to their quality
control system for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide
reasonable assurance that the engagement was conducted in compliance with
professional standards, that there was appropriate continuity of Arthur Andersen
personnel working on the audit, availability of national office consultation,
and availability of personnel at foreign affiliates of Arthur Andersen to
conduct the relevant portions of the audit.

Sincerely,


    /s/  Kirk C. Saylor
------------------------------------
Kirk C. Saylor
Principal Financial & Accounting Officer
KBS International Holdings Inc.: Exhibit 10.15 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com











Exhibit 10.15



Extension of Collecting Technology Service and Development Fee


To: Hongri (Fujian) Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. (Consigner) 


Re: Fees for Technology Development Service Contract 


The parties have executed the Technology Development Service Contract on December 18, 2006. Based on friendly consultation, the service provider agrees that all the outstanding payable service fee under the above-mentioned agreement shall be delayed
collecting without incurring any interests. The Consigner can finish the payment of relevant fees upon or before December 31, 2013. 


 


Service Provider: Roller Rome Limited (Chopped with the Company Seal) 

Authorized Representative: Keyan YAN (Signature) 


Date: February 28, 2011