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

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1042

To require country of origin labeling of perishable agricultural commodities

imported into the United States and to establish penalties for violations

of the labeling requirements.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 21, 1997

Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. GRAHAM, and Mr. JOHNSON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

A BILL

To require country of origin labeling of perishable agricultural commodities imported into the United States and

to establish penalties for violations of the labeling requirements.

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 ‘‘Imported Produce La5 beling Act of 1997’’.
2

•S 1042 IS

1 SEC. 2. INDICATION OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF IMPORTED

2 PERISHABLE AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES.

3 (a) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section, the

4 terms ‘‘perishable agricultural commodity’’ and ‘‘retailer’’

5 have the meanings given the terms in section 1(b) of the

6 Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, 1930 (7 U.S.C.

7 499a(b)).

8 (b) NOTICE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN REQUIRED.—

9 A retailer of a perishable agricultural commodity imported

10 into the United States shall inform consumers, at the final

11 point of sale of the perishable agricultural commodity to

12 consumers, of the country of origin of the perishable agri13 cultural commodity.

14 (c) METHOD OF NOTIFICATION.—

15 (1) IN GENERAL.—The information required by

16 subsection (b) may be provided to consumers by

17 means of a label, stamp, mark, placard, or other

18 clear and visible sign on the imported perishable ag19 ricultural commodity or on the package, display,

20 holding unit, or bin containing the commodity at the

21 final point of sale to consumers.

22 (2) LABELED COMMODITIES.—If the imported

23 perishable agricultural commodity is already individ24 ually labeled regarding country of origin by the

25 packer, importer, or another person, the retailer
3

•S 1042 IS

1 shall not be required to provide any additional infor2 mation to comply with this section.

3 (d) VIOLATIONS.—If a retailer fails to indicate the

4 country of origin of an imported perishable agricultural

5 commodity as required by subsection (b), the Secretary of

6 Agriculture may impose a monetary penalty on the retailer

7 in an amount not to exceed—

8 (1) $1,000 for the first day on which the viola9 tion occurs; and

10 (2) $250 for each day on which the same viola11 tion continues.

12 (e) DEPOSIT OF FUNDS.—Amounts collected under

13 subsection (d) shall be deposited in the Treasury of the

14 United States as miscellaneous receipts.

15 (f) APPLICATION OF SECTION.—This section shall

16 apply with respect to a perishable agricultural commodity

17 imported into the United States after the end of the 6-

18 month period beginning on the date of the enactment of

19 this section.

Æ
EXHIBIT
32.1






Certification
of CEO and CFO


pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


regarding Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of a Texas corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify
that:





1.  The
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal period ended December 31,
2008, (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.  Information
contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods
presented herein.








Date:  October 28,
2009
 
 By: /s/ Steven L.
Sample
 Steven L.
Sample
 Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:151
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 2 of 16 PageID #:152
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 3 of 16 PageID #:153
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 4 of 16 PageID #:154
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 5 of 16 PageID #:155
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 6 of 16 PageID #:156
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 7 of 16 PageID #:157
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 8 of 16 PageID #:158
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 9 of 16 PageID #:159
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 10 of 16 PageID #:160
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 11 of 16 PageID #:161
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 12 of 16 PageID #:162
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 13 of 16 PageID #:163
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 14 of 16 PageID #:164
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 15 of 16 PageID #:165
Case: 1:03-cv-08641 Document #: 24 Filed: 11/30/04 Page 16 of 16 PageID #:166
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED  STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SAID STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                            0
<SECURITIES>                                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             5,638,659
<ALLOWANCES>                                                303,944
<INVENTORY>                                               1,878,081
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          7,505,068
<PP&E>                                                    5,600,808
<DEPRECIATION>                                              968,846
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           15,806,031
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    16,835,776
<BONDS>                                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     1,927,989
<PREFERRED>                                                       0
<COMMON>                                                        948
<OTHER-SE>                                               (3,872,844)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             15,806,031
<SALES>                                                  42,390,476
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         42,390,476
<CGS>                                                    33,287,117
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            12,239,202
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            606,708
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            403,142
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        1,638,056
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          (5,773,885)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      (5,773,885)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                   0
<CHANGES>                                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                             (5,573,855)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 (6.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 (6.52)


</TABLE>
Filed: July 23, 2002

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6212

(CR-98-282, CA-00-1192-1)

United States of America,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

Eric Pearson Lee,

Defendant - Appellant.

ORDER

The court amends its opinion filed April 30, 2002, as follows:

On page 2, lines 2 and 3 of text: The prepositional phrase is

corrected to read “under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001).”

For the Court

/s/ Patricia S. Connor

Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6212

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ERIC PEARSON LEE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr.,

District Judge. (CR-98-282, CA-00-1192-1)

Submitted: April 18, 2002 Decided: April 30, 2002

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Pearson Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Eric Pearson Lee seeks to appeal the district court’s orders

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 2001) and denying reconsideration of that order. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Lee, Nos. CR-98-282; CA-00-1192-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov.

27, 2001; Feb. 6, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
ptve-ex104_138.htm



Exhibit 10.4



 

TO:TIM LEVENDA

 

FROM:STEVE ESTES  /S/ STEVE ESTES

 

DATE:JULY 8, 2019

 

SUBJECT:PLANNED ISSUANCE OF RESTRICTED STOCK



 



 



 



 

As we have discussed, a critical component of our ongoing business strategy for Pactiv LLC will be to explore opportunities for the business that could lead to an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of the business, either as a stand-alone business or as part of a combined entity with other RGHL businesses, or potentially a divestiture of the associated business entities. Your assistance is needed by Pactiv as we work through this process to help prepare the business for a successful transaction.

 

If the IPO is successful, the company whose shares are registered in the IPO will issue you Restricted Stock at the completion of the IPO. The number of shares in this grant equals $400,000 divided by the IPO price as of the date of the grant, rounded to the nearest whole share. Vesting for the restricted stock will occur over a 3-year period with 1/3 vesting after 12-months from the successful IP0; 1/3 vesting after 24-months from the successful IPO; and, 1/3 vesting after 36-months from the successful IPO. You must be an employee of the Company or one of its affiliates on the applicable vesting date to receive such shares.

 

Should there be a business sale instead of an IPO, you will receive $400,000 in cash in lieu of Restricted Stock. For purposes hereof, a business sale means a sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company (or, if the Company has been combined with another RGHL entity, of that combined entity) or a sale of more than 50% of the equity of the Company or such entity. This cash payment will be made in the following manner:

 

1⁄2 Payable 30-days post-closing of the sale

 

1⁄2 Payable 180-days post-closing of the sale

 

This memo does not change your status as an "at-will" employee and does not guarantee your employment for any specific period of time. The Company reserves the right to terminate you at any time and for any or no reason. Any Restricted Stock issued or cash payment made pursuant to this memo shall be subject to regular tax withholdings and other authorized deductions and will not be treated as compensation for any purpose under any benefit plans or programs, unless statutorily required.

 

This memo is provided to summarize the agreement that has been reached in this regard between the Company and the employee. Should an IPO be completed, a formal grant letter for the Restricted Stock will be provided to the employee that documents all terms and conditions related to the grant.
<PAGE>

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby  consent to the  incorporation  by reference  into the previously
filed  Registration  Statement  on Form  S-8 (No.  333-39897)  of  Little  Falls
Bancorp,  Inc. (the "Company") of our report dated January 22, 1999,  except for
the last two  paragraphs  of Note 2, as to which the date is January  26,  1999,
included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 1998.



                                             /s/Radics & Co., LLC
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Radics & Co., LLC

-------------------------
Pine Brook, New Jersey
March 22, 1999
# Official Journal C 82A/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2013.082.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 82A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5621 March 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2013.082.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 82A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5621 March 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| 2013/C 082A/01 | Corrigendum to notice of open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) (OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010) | 1 |
| 2013/C 082A/02 | Corrigendum to notice of open competitions EPSO/AD/178-179/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010) | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

Corrigenda

2013/C 082A/01

Corrigendum to notice of open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) (OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010)

(OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010)

1

2013/C 082A/02

Corrigendum to notice of open competitions EPSO/AD/178-179/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

(OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

6

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 27 | (RO) |
| 29 | |
| 33 | |
| 34 | |
| 36 | (DA) |
| 41 | (BG) |
| 43 | (EN) |
| 49 | (ET) |
| 50 | (HU) |
| 51 | (SL) |
| 54 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 58 | (EN/GA) |
| 75 | |
| 81 | |
| 82 | |

5

27

(RO)

29

33

34

36

(DA)

41

(BG)

43

(EN)

49

(ET)

50

(HU)

51

(SL)

54

(DE/EN/FR)

58

(EN/GA)

75

81

82

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

EN
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS
 
We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" and to the
incorporation by reference in the registration statements of Venture Seismic
Ltd. (the "Company") on Form S-8 (File No. 333-38487) and the post-effective
amendment No. 2 on Form S-3 to the Company's Registration Statement on Form SB-2
(File No. 33-97132) and related prospectus of the Company, of our report dated
February 19, 1997 with respect to the audits of the financial statements of
Continental Holdings Ltd. as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and for the years
then ended, which report is included in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the
Company for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1997.
 
Calgary, Alberta                                   /s/ MEYERS NORRIS PENNY & CO.
December 23, 1997                                          Chartered Accountants
**Exhibit 10.29**

**TERMINATION AGREEMENT**

**THIS TERMINATION AGREEMENT** (this “Agreement”) is made this 31st day October, 2009, by and among Applied Optical Systems, Inc. (“Company”); Optical Cable Corporation (“Lender”), and G. Thomas Hazelton, Jr. and Daniel Roehrs(collectively, the “Existing Shareholders”). 

**W I T N E S S E T H**

**WHEREAS**, Company, Lender, Existing Shareholders, and R. M. Flower entered into that certain Shareholders and Lenders Rights Agreementdated as of April 22, 2005 (the “Lenders Rights Agreement”); 

**WHEREAS**, the Lenders Rights Agreement maybe modified by Company, Lender and Founders (as defined in the Lenders Rights Agreement) holding a majority of the shares owned by all the Founders, and the Existing Shareholders hold all of the shares owned by all the Founders. 

**WHEREAS**, Company, Lender and Existing Shareholders all desire to terminate the Lenders Rights Agreement. 

**NOW, THEREFORE,** in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions and undertakings of the parties hereto and other good andvaluable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

1.The Lenders Rights Agreement is hereby terminated effective as of the date hereof at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (the “Termination Time”), and shall thereafter be considered null and void for all purposes. 

2. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia except its conflict of law provisions. 

3. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, and all counterparts taken together will constitute one agreement binding allparties. Signatures of the parties transmitted by facsimile or e-mail shall be deemed to be original signatures for all purposes. 

[signatures are on the following page] 

**WITNESS**the following signatures: 

 
COMPANY:APPLIED OPTICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
By:
 
/S/ G. THOMAS HAZELTON,JR.
 
Name:
 
G. Thomas Hazelton, Jr.
 
Title:
 
General Manager

LENDER:

OPTICAL CABLE CORPORATION

By:
 
/S/ NEIL D. WILKIN,JR.
 
Name:
 
Neil D. Wilkin, Jr.
 
Title:
 
President and CEO
EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS:/S/ G. THOMAS HAZELTON, JR.
 

G. Thomas Hazelton, Jr.

/S/ DANIEL ROEHRS

Daniel Roehrs
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-22-00029-CR

No. 10-22-00030-CR

DAVID WESLEY COWDEN,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 249th District Court

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. DC-F202200026

and DC-F202200027

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In each of these two causes, Appellant David Wesley Cowden attempts to appeal 

from the trial court’s January 13, 2022 order denying his motion to dismiss under article 

32.01 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. We will dismiss these appeals for want of 

jurisdiction. 

Jurisdiction must be expressly given to the courts of appeals. Ragston v. State, 424 

S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Ford, 553 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Waco 
Cowden v. State Page 2

2018, orig. proceeding). The standard for determining jurisdiction is not whether the 

appeal is precluded by law, but whether the appeal is authorized by law. Abbott v. State, 

271 S.W.3d 694, 696–97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Ford, 553 S.W.3d at 731.

Article 44.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides, “A defendant in any 

criminal action has the right of appeal under the rules hereinafter prescribed.” TEX. CODE 

CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. This statutory right of appeal has been interpreted as 

allowing appeal only from a final judgment. See State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The courts of appeals therefore do not have jurisdiction to review 

interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been otherwise expressly granted by law. 

Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

We have not found any rule or any statutory or constitutional provision that 

would authorize Cowden’s appeals from the trial court’s January 13, 2022 interlocutory 

order denying his motion to dismiss. Accordingly, the order is not appealable, and we 

have no jurisdiction to entertain Cowden’s appeals from the order. See id. 

Notwithstanding that we are dismissing these appeals, Cowden may file a motion 

for rehearing with this Court within fifteen days after the judgment of this Court is 

rendered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. If Cowden desires to have the decision of this Court 

reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that petition must be filed with the 

Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty days after either the day this Court’s judgment 

is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this Court. See 

id. R. 68.2(a).
Cowden v. State Page 3

MATT JOHNSON

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Johnson, and 

Justice Smith

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed February 16, 2022

Do not publish

[CR25]
# Official Journal C 52/10 F

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 52 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6610 February 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 52

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6610 February 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 52/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2023/C 52/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 52/02 | State aid – United Kingdom – State aid SA.34914 (2013/C) – United Kingdom – Gibraltar Corporate Income Tax Regime – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  ) | 10 |
| 2023/C 52/03 | State Aid – Lithuania – State Aid SA.44678 (2022/C) (ex 2018/N) – Modification of aid for LNG Terminal in Lithuania – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  ) | 27 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2023/C 52/02

State aid – United Kingdom – State aid SA.34914 (2013/C) – United Kingdom – Gibraltar Corporate Income Tax Regime – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  )

1

10

2023/C 52/03

State Aid – Lithuania – State Aid SA.44678 (2022/C) (ex 2018/N) – Modification of aid for LNG Terminal in Lithuania – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  )

1

27

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN