alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0047 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0047

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation correcting Regulation (EC) No 1786/2003 on the common organisation of the market for dried fodder (COM(2005)0572 - C6-0410/2005 - 2005/0225(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 290 E , 29/11/2006 P. 0071 - 0072 *

P6_TA(2006)0047

COM for dried fodder *

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation correcting Regulation (EC) No 1786/2003 on the common organisation of the market for dried fodder (COM(2005) 0572 — C6-0410/2005 — 2005/0225(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2005)0572) [1],

- having regard to Articles 36 and 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0410/2005),

- having regard to Rule 51 and Rule 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A6-0008/2006),

1. Approves the Commission proposal;

2. Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3. Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

4. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
EX-10.1





 Exhibit 10.1 

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE 
 STONEMOR
AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 2019 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT (the “Second Amendment”) to the StoneMor Amended and Restated 2019 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended from
time to time (the “Plan”), has been adopted by StoneMor Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Plan. 

W I T N E S S E T H: 
 WHEREAS,
the Company previously adopted the Plan; 
 WHEREAS, Section 7(a) of the Plan provides that the board of directors of the Company (the
“Board”) or the Compensation, Nominating and Governance Committee of the Board may amend the Plan from time to time without the consent of any other person except as required by applicable law or the rules of the principal securities
exchange, if any, on which the Units are traded; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board now desires to amend the Plan to increase the number of Units
reserved for issuance under the Plan by 1,375,000 Units; and 
 WHEREAS, the Units are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange,
whose listing standards require approval of such an amendment by the stockholders of the Company. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby
amended as set forth below: 
 The first sentence of Section 4(a) of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the
following: 
 “Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 4(c) and Section 7, the number of Units that may be delivered with respect to
Awards under the Plan is 9,875,000 Units, and the aggregate of all such Units shall be available for the issuance of Units upon the exercise of ISOs; provided, however, that no Units in excess of 8,500,000 may be delivered with respect to Awards
under the Plan unless and until the stockholders of the Company have approved the delivery thereof, and any Awards under the Plan with respect to such excess shares shall be expressly conditioned upon receipt of such approval.”
#### Joanne Tapia et al., Respondents, v Schindler Elevator Corporation, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[942 NYS2d 892] —

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated December 21, 2010, as denied those branches of its motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint or, in the alternative, to strike the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the evidence it submitted in support of that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Green v City of New York,*76 AD3d 508, 509 [2010]; *see generally Gaspard v Barkly Coverage Corp.,*65 AD3d 1188, 1189 [2009]; *Johnson v Nouveau El. Indus., Inc.,*38 AD3d 611, 612 [2007]; *Oxenfeldt v 22 N. Forest Ave. Corp.,*30 AD3d 391, 392 [2006]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s motion regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ opposing papers *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]).

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discre*879tion in declining to strike the plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 *(see Kihl v Pfeffer,*94 NY2d 118 [1999]; *Polsky v Tuckman,*85 AD3d 750 [2011]). Skelos, J.P., Florio, Belen and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the unaudited
financial statements contained therein.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             396
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,835
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      5,526
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           5,973
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         38,078
<ALLOWANCE>                                         59
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  54,589
<DEPOSITS>                                      33,078
<SHORT-TERM>                                       442
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                312
<LONG-TERM>                                     13,736
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,021
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  54,589
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,496
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  416
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    27
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,939
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 752
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,169
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              770
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        5
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    711
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    178
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         178
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       118
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.38
<LOANS-NON>                                        126
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                    66
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       14
<RECOVERIES>                                         2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                   59
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             59
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.4


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


      The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
Geodyne Energy Income Limited Partnership II-D ("Issuer") for the period ending
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (b)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

      Dated this 19th day of March, 2004.

                                   GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                   PARTNERSHIP II-D
                                   ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)
#### In the Matter of Joseph Garcia, Appellant, v Theodore Reid et al., Respondents.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination finding the petitioner guilty of misconduct, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Braatz, J.), dated June 21, 1985, which dismissed the proceeding on the merits.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Based upon the instant record, the petition challenging the determination under review was properly dismissed. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Fiber, JJ., concur.
#### Michael William Printery, Inc., Appellant, v Qual Krom, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Sue T. Crane, Doing Business as S. Temper Crane Associates, Third-Party Defendant.

— Levine, J.

Defendant, Qual Krom, Inc. (Qual Krom), entered into a contract with plaintiff through Qual Krom’s agent, S. Temper Crane Associates (Crane), whereby plaintiff was to prepare and print 20,000 brochures for Qual Krom’s use in advertising its chrome plating business. Conflicts which developed during the course of performance under the contract resulted in plaintiff commencing a suit against Qual Krom for breach of contract. Qual Krom responded, asserted counterclaims, and interposed a third-party claim against Crane. Thereafter, plaintiff brought on a motion for summary judgment. Special Term granted the motion due to Qual Krom’s failure to timely serve papers in response to the motion. Qual Krom subsequently sought a vacatur of that default, contending that it had a meritorious defense and counterclaims and that its delay of several days in responding, attributable to law office failure, was not prejudicial to plaintiff. Special Term vacated the default and this appeal by plaintiff ensued.

On appeal plaintiff contends that Special Term abused its discretion in vacating Qual Krom’s default and that, even *278were such a vacatur warranted, summary judgment in plaintiffs favor was appropriate based upon the pleadings and papers submitted to the court. We disagree.

Since Qual Krom’s delay in responding to plaintiffs application for summary judgment was brief, Qual Krom demonstrated the meritoriousness of its defense and counterclaims and an intention to defend the action, and plaintiff failed to establish prejudice, it was within Special Term’s discretion to vacate the default which resulted from Qual Krom’s law office failure *(see,*CPLR 2004, 5015 [a]; *Sanders & Assoc. v Hague Dev. Corp.,*100 AD2d 964, 965; *Maze v Di Bartolo,*97 AD2d 815). Plaintiffs contention that summary judgment in its favor was appropriate even after the vacatur of the default is unavailing. Qual Krom alleged in its answer to the complaint that it had informed plaintiff that proofs prepared for the advertisement brochure were unacceptable, that plaintiff therefore had notice that Crane lacked authority to accept the proofs for publication, and that a Qual Krom employee had mistakenly and without authority accepted several hundred of the printed brochures. Accordingly, since plaintiffs breach of contract action is based on Crane’s acceptance of the proofs and Qual Krom’s alleged acceptance of at least some of the printed brochures, questions of fact exist which preclude the granting of summary judgment.

Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350

Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the
undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer of Nicholas Financial, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended June 30, 2007 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Peter L Vosotas                  
|Peter L. Vosotas                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer

Dated: August 9, 2007
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.2


                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 Quarterly Report of Waypoint Financial Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
H. Moss, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

       (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 result of
              operations of the Company.

/s/ James H. Moss
-----------------
James H. Moss,
Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

November 14, 2003

                                       37
Exhibit 10.6


 


SUSTAINABLE OPPORTUNITIES ACQUISITION CORP.


1601 Bryan Street, Suite 4141


Dallas, Texas 75201


 


May 8, 2020


 


Sustainable Opportunities Holdings LLC


1601 Bryan Street, Suite 4141


Dallas, Texas 75201


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter will confirm
our agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement
(the “Registration Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”)
of the securities of Sustainable Opportunities Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) and continuing until
the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in
each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination
Date”), Sustainable Opportunities Holdings LLC (the “Sponsor”), shall take steps directly
or indirectly to make available to the Company certain office space, secretarial and administrative services as may be required
by the Company from time to time, situated at 1601 Bryan Street, Suite 4141, Dallas, Texas 75201 (or any successor location). In
exchange therefore, the Company shall pay the Sponsor a sum of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter
until the Termination Date. The Sponsor hereby agrees that it does not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind (a
“Claim”) in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the “Trust Account”)
that may be established upon the consummation of the IPO and hereby waives any Claim it may have in the future as a result of,
or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements with the Company and will not seek recourse against the Trust Account
for any reason whatsoever.


 


This letter agreement constitutes the entire
agreement and understanding of the parties hereto in respect of its subject matter and supersedes all prior understandings, agreements,
or representations by or among the parties hereto, written or oral, to the extent they relate in any way to the subject matter
hereof or the transactions contemplated hereby.


 


This letter agreement may not be amended, modified
or waived as to any particular provision, except by a written instrument executed by the parties hereto.


 


The parties may assign this letter agreement
and any of their rights, interests, or obligations hereunder at any time upon five days’ notice to the other party.


 


This letter agreement shall be governed by,
construed in accordance with, and interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of New York, without giving effect to its choice
of laws principles.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     


    

 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	SUSTAINABLE OPPORTUNITIES ACQUISITION CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Scott Leonard
	 	Name:	Scott Leonard
	 	Title:	Chief Executive Officer


 


AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:


SUSTAINABLE OPPORTUNITIES HOLDINGS LLC


 


	By: 	/s/ Scott Leonard	 
	Name:  	Scott Leonard	 
	Title: 	Managing Member
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1978

To designate the auditorium located within the Sandia Technology Transfer

Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as the ‘‘Steve Schiff Auditorium’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 23, 1998

Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. BINGAMAN) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To designate the auditorium located within the Sandia Technology Transfer Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico,

as the ‘‘Steve Schiff Auditorium’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

4 The Congress makes the following findings:

5 (1) Congressman Steve Schiff represented the

6 First Congressional District of New Mexico in Con7 gress from 1988 to 1998 with honor and distinction.

8 (2) Mr. Schiff chaired the Subcommittee on

9 Basic Research of the Committee on Science empha-
2

S 1978 IS

1 sizing protection and improvement of America’s eco2 nomic and military strength into the 21st century

3 through the support of a robust national science and

4 technology infrastructure.

5 (3) Mr. Schiff was a tireless advocate of facili6 tating the transfer of technologies developed at fed7 erally supported institutions into the commercial sec8 tor.

9 (4) Mr. Schiff supported technology transfer ef10 forts at Sandia National Laboratory, located in the

11 First Congressional District of New Mexico, includ12 ing its cooperative research and development pro13 grams, which have benefited the people of New Mex14 ico and the Nation as a whole.

15 (5) Mr. Schiff’s contributions should be ac16 knowledged with a fitting tribute within the district

17 he so selflessly served.

18 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION.

19 The auditorium located within the Sandia Technology

20 Transfer Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and known

21 as Building 825, shall be known and designated as the

22 ‘‘Steve Schiff Auditorium’’.

23 SEC. 3. REFERENCES.

24 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

25 paper, or other record of the United States to the audito-
3

S 1978 IS

1 rium referred to in section 2 shall be deemed to be a ref2 erence to the ‘‘Steve Schiff Auditorium’’.

Æ
<PAGE>   1




EXHIBIT 11
HIE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE LOSS
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
(UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         THREE MONTHS ENDED         NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                           SEPTEMBER 30,              SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                    ----------------------      ------------------------
                                                      1999          1998           1999            1998
                                                    --------       -------      ----------       -------
<S>                                                 <C>            <C>          <C>              <C>
Net earnings (loss)                                 $   (472)      $   985      $   (3,492)      $   255
                                                    ========       =======      ==========       =======

Weighted average number of common
 shares outstanding                                   25,375        24,089          25,308        23,826
                                                    ========       =======      ==========       =======

Basic net earnings (loss) per common share          $  (0.02)      $  0.04      $    (0.14)      $  0.01
                                                    ========       =======      ==========       =======

Shares used in diluted net earnings (loss) per
 share calculation:
 Weighted average number of common
  shares outstanding                                  25,375        24,089          25,308        23,826

Additional shares assumed outstanding
 from dilutive stock options and warrants
 used in diluted earnings (loss) per share
 calculation(1)                                           --         1,408              --         1,221
                                                    --------       -------      ----------       -------
                                                      25,375        25,497          25,308        25,047
                                                    ========       =======      ==========       =======

Diluted net earnings (loss) per common share        $  (0.02)      $  0.04      $    (0.14)      $  0.01
                                                    ========       =======      ==========       =======
</TABLE>


(1) Since stock options and warrants are antidilutive to the diluted loss per
    common share calculations, stock options and warrants are not considered in
    such diluted loss per share calculations for the three and nine months ended
    September 30, 1999.