alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10_11.htm


    
 

    
      

      

    

    
 

    EXHIBIT
10.11

    


    During
the Company’s Board of Directors meeting held on November 16, 2009, the Board
approved compensation increases paid to non-employee directors.  The
following table reflects the compensation effective January 1, 2010, and the
compensation previously paid to non-employee Directors.

    


    


    
      	 
      	 	
              Compensation
      Effective January 1, 2010

            	 	 	
              Previous
      Compensation

            	 
	
               

              Base
      compensation, per annum

               

            	 	$	30,000	 	 	$	25,000	 
	
              Attendance
      fee per meeting

               

            	 	 	1,000	 	 	 	--	 
	
              Additional
      annual compensation for

                  Chairman
      of the Audit Committee

               

            	 	 	5,000	 	 	 	5,000	 
	
              Additional
      annual compensation for

                  Chairman
      of the Compensation Committee

               

            	 	 	2,500	 	 	 	--	 
	
              Additional
      annual compensation for

                  Chairman
      of the Nominating and Corporate

                  Governance
      Committee

               

            	 	 	2,500	 	 	 	--
EXHIBIT 11.1


                   COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED
                    NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE FOR
            THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2003 AND 2002

     The following calculation is submitted in accordance with
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:


                                                 For the three months
                                                    ended March 31,
                                                 --------------------
                                                   2003        2002
                                                 --------------------
Basic net income per share:
-------------------------------------------------
Weighted average common shares outstanding         7,597      7,337
                                                 ====================
  Net income from continuing operations           $1,591       $605
  Basic net income from continuing operations
    per share                                      $0.21      $0.08

  Income (loss) from discontinued operations        ($71)        $5
  Basic loss from discontinued operations
    per share                                     ($0.01)         -

  Net income                                      $1,520       $610
  Basic net income per share                       $0.20      $0.08


Diluted net income per share:
-------------------------------------------------
Weighted average common shares outstanding         7,597      7,337

Common stock equivalents - stock options and
  warrants                                            52        343
                                                  --------------------
Total weighted average number of diluted shares    7,649      7,680
                                                  ====================

  Net income from continuing operations           $1,591       $605
  Diluted net income from continuing operations
    per share                                      $0.21      $0.08

  Income (loss) from discontinued operations        ($71)        $5
  Diluted loss from discontinued operations
    per share                                     ($0.01)         -

  Net income                                      $1,520       $610
  Diluted net income per share                     $0.20      $0.08
Exhibit 10.4
  April
15, 2008
 
 
 Andrew
J. Weil (“Executive”)
 625
Madison Ave., 5th Floor
 New
York, New York 10022
 
 RE:  Amendment
to Executive Employment Agreement
 
 Dear
Andrew:
 
 On
January 1, 2007, you and Centerline Capital Group,
Inc.(the “Company”) entered into an
Executive Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”).  Pursuant to Section
10(b) of the Agreement, the Agreement may be amended by a written instrument
signed by the Executive and the Company.  The parties hereto wish to
amend the Employment Agreement as provided herein.
 
 THEREFORE,
the parties, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows:
 
 1.           Amendment
of Agreement.  Section 3,
entitled Compensation
and Benefits, shall be amended to include a salary reduction of 10% in
base salary.  The following sentences shall be incorporated at the end
of section 3 (a), and read as follows:
 
 The
Executive agrees to a voluntary reduction in his base salary of 10% for the
period April 21, 2008 (the “Effective Date”) through
December 31, 2008 (the “End
Date”).  The Company will pay the Executive an amended base
salary (subsequent to the Effective Date and through the End Date, (“Salary”) of 360,000.00 per
annum payable in equal bi-weekly installments.  This reduction in
Salary is voluntary and does not constitute Good Reason, as defined in
Exhibit A of the Agreement.  The Parties agree that the reduction in
Salary is being done to reduce the Company’s overhead and compensation expense
and is contingent upon every person listed in Exhibit A, attached hereto, executing a
similar amendment to his Employment Agreement.  Unless otherwise
agreed to by Executive, on January 1, 2009, the Executive’s Salary will return
to $400,000.00.  Anything in this Agreement, as amended by this
Amendment, to the contrary notwithstanding, if the Executive’s employment with
the Company is terminated after the Effective Date and prior to January 1, 2009,
his Salary used in determining Severance Pay, if applicable,
will be the base Salary of $400,000.00, as originally stated in the
Agreement.
 
 2.           Effect of
Amendment.The parties herby
agree and acknowledge that except as provided in this Amendment, the Agreement
remains in full force and effect and has not been modified in any other
respect.
  
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties have executed this Agreement, Centerline Capital Group, Inc. and
Centerline Holding Company acting by their respective duly authorized officers,
effective as of the Effective Date.
 
 
 CENTERLINE
      CAPITAL GROUP, INC.:
            
            EXECUTIVE:ByName:  Marc D.
      Schnitzer
              Title:     President
            
            Name:   Andrew J.
      WeilCENTERLINE
      HOLDING COMPANYByName:  Marc D.
      Schnitzer
              Title:     Chief Executive Officer and
      President
 
 
 
  
  EXHIBIT A
 
 
 Marc
D. Schnitzer
 Leonard
W. Cotton
 James
L. Duggins
 Robert
L. Levy
 Paul
Smyth
 Chris
Crouch
 Andrew
J. Weil
 Justin
E. Ginsberg
 John
E. D’Amico
 Nicholas
A. C. Mumford
#### UNITED STATES v. Michael R. ROBINSON, [ XXX-XX-XXXX ], Private (E-1), U. S. Marine Corps.

NCM 76 0477.

U. S. Navy Court of Military Review.

Sentence Adjudged 14 Nov. 1975.

Decided 12 April 1976.

CDR C. A. Buhler, JAGO, USN, Appellate Defense Counsel; CAPT Ronald J. Waicukauski, USMCR, Appellate Government Counsel.

*945Before CEDARBRUG, C. J., MURRAY, Senior Judge, and GLASGOW, J.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant pleaded guilty and was found guilty of four periods of unauthorized absence totaling approximately thirty months. The special court-martial military judge who heard his case sentenced him to a bad conduct discharge and confinement at hard labor for two months. The convening authority approved the sentence but suspended the confinement at hard labor in excess of thirty-five days, which action was approved by the supervisory authority.

Appellant assigns a single error that the military judge erred in failing to advise him of his right to plead the Statute of Limitations as to the first specification alleging a sixteen-month absence, citing paragraph 68c, Manual for Courts-Martial, 1969 (Revised edition).

The military judge should have affirmatively advised appellant if it appeared “from the charges or from the evidence introduced at the trial that the Statute had run.” Id.

More than two years, the applicable period of limitation, elapsed between the first absence commencing on 10 September 1973 and the preferral of charges on 22 October 1975. However, appellant explained during the plea inquiry that he was in the custody of civilian authorities from 29 September 1974 until 20 July 1975. Article 43(d), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 843(d), provides that periods in the custody of civilian authorities shall be excluded in computing the period of limitation prescribed by the Article. Consequently, the period of limitation was clearly not exceeded and was not available to appellant. The military judge did not err. *United States v. Shell,*7 U.S.C.M.A. 646, 652, 23 C.M.R. 110, 116 (1957).

The findings and sentence as approved on review below are affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Secure Computing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel P. Ryan, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 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/ Daniel P. Ryan             
|Daniel P. Ryan                 
|Interim Chief Executive Officer
|May 8, 2008
#### First School District of Pennsylvania to use of Charles Krause, Appellant, *v.*Frederick H. Green, Principal, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Surety.

December 14, 1925:

*Practice*— Municipal *Court*— Auditor’s *report*— Exceptions—Petition *to file exceptions nunc pro tunc*— Refusal.

A petition to allow exceptions to an auditor’s report to be filed, nunc pro tunc, is properly refused, where three months have elapsed since the confirmation of the report, and payments have been made in accordance therewith.

Argued November 12,1925.

Appeal No. 277 October T., 1925, by plaintiff, from decree of Municipal Court of Philadelphia October T., 1922, No. 1053, in the case of First School District of Pennsylvania to use of Charles Krause v. Frederick H. Green, Principal, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Surety.

Before Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit on surety bond.

Before Walsh, J.

Petition to allow exceptions to be filed nunc pro tunc.

The Court dismissed the petition. Petitioner appealed.

*Error assigned,*among others, was the order of the Court.

*James Yearsley,*for appellant.

No appearance 'and no printed brief for appellee.

Per Curiam,

This is an appeal from a decree of the court below confirming absolutely the report of an auditor appointed to distribute a fund paid into court by the surety in this proceeding. The report of the auditor *541stated that he had mailed to the creditors and to the attorneys who had presented claims, notice that his report was prepared and ready for inspection and the filing of exceptions, and that unless exceptions were filed on or before the 20th of January 1925, the report would on that day he filed. No exceptions were filed to the report, with the auditor or in court, and it was duly filed on the day fixed and subsequently confirmed absolutely by the court. It is important here to observe that this appellant does not, in any of the belated exceptions and affidavits filed by him, allege that he did not receive the notice mailed by the auditor. The matter thus rested for almost three months, when appellant having made a change of counsel, moved the court for leave to file exceptions nunc pro tunc, which motion was refused. The confirmation of the report of the auditor and the refusal of the court, three months later, to allow the appellant to file exceptions nunc pro tunc are assigned for error. The order of the court confirming the report of the auditor directed the clerk of the court to make distribution of the fund in accordance with the findings of the report. The history of the case, as printed by the appellant, states that, at the time the appellant asked leave to file exceptions nunc pro tunc, the clerk had made payments out of the fund in accordance with the terms of the order. The appellant having failed to file exceptions to the report of the auditor, the court did not err in approving that report, nor in refusing, in the existing circumstances, to allow exceptions to he filed nunc pro tunc.

The appeal is dismissed.
Exhibit 10.39








Exhibit 10.39




AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO

COMMON STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT





This Amendment No. 1 to the Common Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of March 24, 2010 (this
“Amendment”), to the Common Stock Purchase Agreement dated as of December 15, 2008 (the “Purchase
Agreement”) is entered into by and between BioSante Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Company”), and Kingsbridge Capital
Limited, an entity organized and existing under the laws of the British Virgin Islands (the
“Investor”).



1. Reference to the Purchase Agreement; Definitions. Reference is made to the Purchase
Agreement and, specifically, to Section 10.6 thereof entitled, “Amendment; No Waiver.” Terms
defined in the Amendment and not otherwise defined herein are used herein with the meanings defined
in the Purchase Agreement.



2. Amendment to the Purchase Agreement. The Purchase Agreement is hereby amended by replacing
the definition of “Maximum Draw Down Amount,” as set forth in Article I thereof, is hereby replaced
in its entirety with the following definition: “Maximum Draw
Down Amount” means 1.5% of the Market
Capitalization as of the date the applicable Draw Down Notice is given.”



3. Miscellaneous. Except as otherwise set forth herein, the Purchase Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect without change or modification. This Amendment shall be construed under
the internal laws of the State of New York. This Amendment may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute
one and the same instrument. This Amendment shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and
their respective successors and assigns.



(Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signature page to follow.)




 


 









 







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to the Common Stock
Purchase Agreement to be signed and delivered by their respective duly authorized representative as
of the date first written above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	KINGSBRIDGE CAPITAL LIMITED

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Adam Gurney	 
	 	 	Adam Gurney, Director	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	BIOSANTE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Phillip B. Donenberg
 	 
	 	 	Phillip B. Donenberg 	 
	 	 	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

U.S. Coast Guard 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

CG-5800D (08/14)

Complainant: 

 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

v. 

Respondent:

For Docketing Center Use Only:

Coast Guard Enforcement Activity Number:

Mail FAX Express courier In Person Electronic Delivery

Mail FAX Express courier In Person Electronic Delivery

Type or print name Signature Date

Docket Number:

20 -

1) I hereby certify I have served the foregoing documents with the Coast Guard Representative by:

2) I hereby certify I have served the foregoing documents with the ALJ Docketing Center by:

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Type or print name Signature Date

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Please select one of the following options:

I am not an attorney but will act as a duly authorized representative.

I am an attorney and in good standing of the bar of any State, District of Columbia, or any 

territory or commonwealth of the United States.

Mail FAX Express courier In Person Electronic Delivery

3) I hereby certify I have served the foregoing documents with the assigned Administrative Law Judge by:

In accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 20.30,notice is hereby given, that 

will represent the above-named respondent in these proceedings. Please direct all copies of notices, motions, orders, and 

other papers served to my attention at the following mailing address:

 Privacy Act Statement 

The legal authority for the collection of information on this form is authorized by 46 U.S.C. Chapter 77 and 33 C.F.R. Part 20. The information provided will be 

used to advocate your position in this administrative proceeding. Unless part of mandatory discovery, submission of the information on this form is voluntary. 

You are solely responsible for the manner in which you want to present your own case. This document will become part of the official record, which can be 

viewed by the public. 33 C.F.R. § 20.903.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

October 7, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00660

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.E., JR.,

From the County Court at Law No 2, Webb C ounty, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CVQ002377

- C3 Honorable Jesus Garza, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

A filing fee of $195.00 was due when this appeal was filed but it was not paid. See T EXAS S UPREME C OURT O RDER R EGARDING F EES C HARGED I N THE S UPREME C OURT , I N C IVIL C ASES I N THE C OURTS OF A PPEALS , AND B EFORE THE J UDICIAL P ANEL ON M ULTIDISTRICT L ITIGATION (Misc. Docket No. 13

- 9127, Aug. 16, 2013). The clerk of the court notified appellant

o f this deficiency in a letter dated September 19, 2014. The fee remains unpaid. Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides:

A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay

— at the time an item is presented fo r filing

— whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5.

We therefore order appellant, not later than O ctober 17, 2014 to e ither (1) pay the applicable filing fee or (2) provide written proof to this court that he is indigent or otherwise excused by statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying the fee. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1 (providing that indigent party wh o complies with provisions of that rule may proceed without advance payment of costs). If appellant fails to respond satisfactorily within the time ordered, this appeal will be dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chap a, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 7th day of October, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottl e Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 13.1

                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 on Form 20-F Tikcro Technologies Ltd.
(the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Izhak Tamir, 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 results of operations of the Company.


Date: June 21, 2004


/s/ Izhak Tamir
---------------

Izhak Tamir
Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32



Certification



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), each of the undersigned officers of FiberNet Telecom Group, Inc., (the
Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 (the Form 10-Q/A) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |                        
|------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: July 9, 2004 |  | /s/ Michael S. Liss    
|                    |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                    | 
|Dated: July 9, 2004 |  | /s/ Jon A. DeLuca      
|                    |  | Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit      10.45**

**Shenzhen      Branch, Bank of China **

**Loan      Certificate (2)**

| Applicant                             |   | Shenzhen                BAK Battery Co., Ltd |   | ID                card of the Applicant   |   | 73109958-5                            |
|---------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                                  |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |
| Currency                              |   | RMB                                          |   | Amount                                    |   | 70,000,000                            |
|                                  |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |
| Loan                date              |   | August.28,                2007               |
|                                  |   |                                         |
| Usage                                 |   | Working                Capital               |
|                                  |   |                                         |
| Annual                rate            |   | 7.02%                                        |
|                                  |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |
| Signature                of Applicant |   | Stamp                of Applicant            |   | Signature                of Bank of China |   | Stamp                of Bank of China |
|                                  |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |
|                                  |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |
| /s/                Xiangqian Li       |   |                                         |   |                                      |   |                                  |

----