alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
cyca_ex102.htm

EXHIBIT 10.2
   
 
  
  
 Property Sublease Cytta/Collins
  
 	 Effective Date 
	  
	 10/25/2020

	  
	  
	  

	 between 
	  
	 Michael Collins (“Sublessor”) located at 8056 Redlands St. #2 Playa Del Rey, CA. 90293

	  
	  
	  

	 and
	  
	 Cytta Corp. (“Sublessee”) a Nevada Corporation located at 5450 W Sahara Ave., Suite 300, Las Vegas NV, 89146


  
 Whereas:
  
 Sublessor is executing a Master Lease for premises for certain property to be leased to the Sublessor as the lessee. Given the government and other security requirements of both sublessor and sublessee the address of the premises is intentionally left out of this agreement.
  
 Now, the lessee as Sublessor wishes to provide Cytta Corp. a sublease which permits Cytta Corp to utilize part of the facilities as lab and testing facility, office, video studio, demonstration facility and storage location subject to the direction of the sublessor. In consideration for the mutual promises, covenants, and agreements made below, the parties, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows:
  
 1. Term & Rent
  
 The Sublessor leases to the Sublessee, and the Sublessee leases from the Sublessor, the Premises commencing 10/26/2020, and terminating on 10/26/2021. The sublease agrees to pay the sublessor the sum of $50,000.00 in advance for the annual lease payment.
  
 2. Uses
  
 The Sublessee shall use and occupy the portion of the premises described above.
  
 Understood, Agreed & Accepted
  
 We have carefully reviewed this contract and agree to and accept its terms and conditions. We are executing this Agreement as of the Effective Date first written above.
  
  
 Accepted and Agreed
  
 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Gary Campbell 	 	 	/s/ Michael Collins	 
	Gary Campbell CEO 	 	 	Michael Collins CTO	 
	Cytta Corp.	 	 	Cytta Corp.
#### Keith R. Wood et al., Respondents, v Harrison J. Nourse, Defendant, and Oatka Valley Construction Company, Inc., Appellant.

Memorandum: Defendant, Oatka Valley Construction Company, Inc., (Oatka), moved for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff while working on a construction site. The complaint alleges causes of action based *1021on claimed violations of Labor Law §§ 200 and 241 and common-law negligence. In support of its motion, Oatka submitted proof in evidentiary form which established that the owner, a codefendant, had hired separate prime contractors to remodel his restaurant; that no contract existed between Oatka and plaintiffs employer; that neither Oatka nor any of its employees had any right to, or did in fact, exercise any supervision or control over plaintiff or his employer; that neither Oatka nor any of its employees controlled or supervised the use of any ladders, boards, wood or other tools used by plaintiff or his employer; and that all wood on the jobsite was provided by the owner.

Although plaintiff as the party opposing the motion is entitled to a presumption of favorable inferences from the facts presented *(Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557), he must present evidentiary facts to create issues requiring trial on the facts established by Oatka *(Burton v Ertel,*107 AD2d 909). There is no dispute that Oatka was an independent prime contractor *(see, Russin v Picciano & Son,*54 NY2d 311) and that each contractor on the project was hired separately. While plaintiff disputes Oatka’s contentions that it did not own, control or provide the lumber upon which the plaintiff tripped, no evidentiary facts in admissible form were presented by plaintiff. The contentions of plaintiff and his attorney, made only upon information and belief, that the lumber was residue of work performed by Oatka do not suffice as proof in evidentiary form to create a question of fact requiring trial *(Onondaga Soil Testing v Barton, Brown, Clyde & Loguidice,*69 AD2d 984). There being no proof in evidentiary form that Oatka provided or placed the lumber, and there being no proffered excuse by plaintiff to explain his failure to meet the strict requirements of proof under CPLR 3212, no question of fact was created which would require trial *(Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs.,*46 NY2d 1065). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Cook, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5722 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

to provide reimbursement for certain services relating to an approved 

letter of map amendment, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2010 

Mr. DRIEHAUS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide reimbursement for certain 

services relating to an approved letter of map amendment, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Fairness in Flood 

5 Mapping Act of 2010’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5722 IH

1 SEC. 2. REIMBURSEMENT RELATING TO AN APPROVED 

2 LETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—If an eligible entity incurs ex4 penses for the services of a covered service provider in ob5 taining a letter of map amendment that is approved by 

6 the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management 

7 Agency in whole or in part, the Administrator shall reim8 burse the eligible entity for the expenses incurred with re9 spect to the part approved. 

10 (b) APPLICABILITY.—Expenses incurred by an eligi11 ble entity for the services of a covered service provider in 

12 obtaining a letter of map amendment that is approved by 

13 the Administrator in whole or in part shall be eligible for 

14 reimbursement under subsection (a) if the approval was 

15 obtained during fiscal year 2003 or thereafter. 

16 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following defi17 nitions apply: 

18 (1) COMMUNITY.—The term ‘‘community’’ has 

19 the meaning given that term in section 59.1 of title 

20 44, Code of Federal Regulations. 

21 (2) COVERED SERVICE PROVIDER.—The term 

22 ‘‘covered service provider’’ means a surveyor, engi23 neer, or other similar service provider, but not a 

24 legal service provider. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5722 IH

1 (3) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—The term ‘‘eligible enti2 ty’’ means an owner of property, a lessee of prop3 erty, or a community. 

4 (4) LETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT.—The term 

5 ‘‘letter of map amendment’’ means a letter of map 

6 amendment as described in part 70 of title 44, Code 

7 of Federal Regulations. 

8 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

9 are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 

10 such sums as may be necessary. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, A.W. Bergeron, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-Kof AES Red Oak, LLC (the “registrant”);

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             [Reserved]

 

c)              Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

d)             Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

a)              all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrols over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  March 24,2005

 
|   | /s/ A.W.  Bergeron |
|--------|--------------------|
|   | A.W.  Bergeron     |
|   | President          |

 

1

----
**EXHIBIT32**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

Each of theundersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in hiscapacity as an officer of SPACEHAB, Incorporated (“SPACEHAB”), that, to thebest of his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SPACEHAB on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended March 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the informationcontained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operation of SPACEHAB.
| Date: May 8, 2007 |                                                            |
|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|              |                                                            |
|              |                                                            |
|              |  /s/Thomas B.  Pickens, III                                |   |
|              |  Thomas B.  Pickens, III                                   |
|              |  President and  Chief Executive Officer                    |
|              |                                                            |
|              |                                                            |
|              |  /s/Brian K.  Harrington                                   |   |
|              |  Brian K.  Harrington                                      |
|              |  Senior Vice  President and   Chief Financial Officer |

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPACEHABand will be retained by SPACEHAB and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

1

----
# C_2021459EN.01000301.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 459/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 459/3

---

AGENCY FOR SUPPORT FOR BEREC

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2020

(2021/C 459/03)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec_office/download/0/10016-berec-office-annual-accounts-for-2020_0.pdf

---
# C_2023075EN.01020401.xml

| 28.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 75/204 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/204

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1108/70 of the Council introducing an accounting system for expenditure on infrastructure in respect of transport by rail, road and inland waterway, and Commission Regulation (EC) No 851/2006 specifying the items to be included under the various headings in the forms of accounts shown in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1108/70

(COM (2022) 381 final)

(2023/C 75/32)

| Referral | European Parliament, 12.9.2022
  Council of the European Union, 12.8.2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society |
| Adopted at plenary | 26.10.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 573 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 170/0/0 |

Referral

European Parliament, 12.9.2022

Council of the European Union, 12.8.2022

Legal basis

Article 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

Adopted at plenary

26.10.2022

Plenary session No

573

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

170/0/0

Since the Committee endorses unreservedly the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 26 October 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---
ex10-31_f10k12312009.htm


    Exhibit
10.30

     

    
      
         

        
          	
                  OIS

                  221
      Lathrop Way, Suite I

                  Sacramento, CA
      95815  

                  USA   

                	
                  www.oisi.com

                  main 088.338.8436

                  fax 916.646.0207

                   

                


        

              

      

    

    
 

    
      August
31, 2007

      VIA
Facsimile and mail

      


      Jonathan
R. Phillips

      792
Chatham Avenue

      Elmhurst,
ILL 60126

      


      


      Re:           Ophthalmic Imaging Systems Board
Membership

      


      


      Dear
Jonathan:

      


      On behalf
of OIS, the Company’s Board of Directors would like to thank you for accepting
its invitation to join the Board.

      


      We’re
very excited about the prospects and focus of the Company, and look forward to
your input in directing the Company to realize its potential.

      


      The
Company will pay an annual retainer in the amount of $15,000, payable in
4  equal quarterly instalglments of  $3,750 for your
attendance at up to 3 Board meetings per quarter.  For your services
in attending meetings in excess of 3 per quarter, the Company will pay you at
the rate of $100 per hour up to a maximum of $500 per day.

      


      Please
indicate your formal acceptance of the foregoing by signing and dating where
indicated below.  At your earliest convenience, please return via
facsimile the executed copy of page 2 to the attention of Mr. Gil Allon at the
Company’s offices at (916) 646-0207.

      


      Again, we
welcome you and thank you for joining us during this very exciting time for the
Company.

      


      Very
truly yours,

      


      /s/ Yigal Berman                                                         

      Yigal
Berman

      Chairman
of the Board of Directors

      Ophthalmic
Imaging Systems

      


      


      Approved:

      


      /s/ Jonathan Philips                                                       

      Jonathan
Philips

      


      Date :
___________

      

         

        
          	Better
      Insight.  Better Sight.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5758 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5758

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 18, 2010

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2 Government Center in Fall River, Massachusetts, as the ``Sergeant 
                 Robert Barrett Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. SERGEANT ROBERT BARRETT POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2 Government Center in Fall River, Massachusetts, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Sergeant Robert Barrett Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
Robert Barrett Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 17, 2010.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00691-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.J. Jr. and D.R.J., Children

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-01185

Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order is AFFIRMED. 

Appellant is indigent; no costs of court are taxed in this appeal.

SIGNED March 18, 2015.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Order entered November 10 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 01030
- CV
RESIDENCES AT RIVERD ALE, L.P. , ET AL. , Appellant s V. DIXIE CARPET INSTALL ATIONS, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199
- 04903
- 2012



### O RDER
We GRANT the November 3, 2015 motion of court reporter LaTresta Ginyard for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. The reporter’s record shall be filed WITHIN
THIRTY DAY S of the date of this order.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
<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 the Quarterly Report of Pyramid Breweries Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
K. Hilger, 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 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 K. HILGER

James K. Hilger
Chief Financial Officer

August 15, 2005
Exhibit 99.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
   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 Dynamic Ventures, Inc. (the "Company")
on  Form  10-KSB  for  the  period  ended  December  31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eric
Boehnke,  Chief  Executive 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 requirements of Sections 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:  March 19, 2003

                                               /s/ Eric Boehnke
                                             ------------------------
                                                   Eric Boehnke
                                             Chief Executive Officer


                                      -1-
<PAGE>
#### Robert O. Dunning *vs.*George B. Staples.

Androscoggin.

Opinion March 3, 1890.

*Verdict. New trial. Evidence.*

When the evidence is conflicting, and its weight to a great extent depends upon the credibility of the witnesses, and it is difficult to determine on which side it preponderates, a verdict will not be disturbed.

On MOTION.

*Swasey and*Briggs, for defendant.

*I. and 3. A.*Bandall, for plaintiff.

Walton, J.

When a verdict is clearly against the weight of evidence, it is the duty of the court to set it aside and grant a new trial; but when the evidence is conflicting, and its weight to a great extent depends upon the credibility of the witnesses, and it is difficult to determine on which side it preponderates, the finding of the jury will not be *disturbed;*the parties must abide by the result.

In this case, the evidence is conflicting. It is an action to recover for poplar wood sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. *433The plaintiff’s evidence tends to show that the quantity was ninety-six cords ; that the quality was good; and that the defendant agreed to pay 03 a cord for it. The defendant’s evidence tends to show that the quantity was very much iess than ninety-six cords; that the quality was inferior: and much of it not worth more than 01 a cord. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for 0235.22. This was considerable less than the amount claimed by the plaintiff. And a careful examination of the evidence fails to satisfy the court that the verdict is wrong, or that the amount is excessive. We think the parties must abide by the result; and that the motion for a new trial must be overruled, and judgment entered on the verdict.

*Motion overruled.*

*Judgment on the verdict.*

Peters, C. J., Virgin, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.