alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 4.10

       SCHEDULE OF WARRANTS ISSUED (Private Placement - Investor Warrants)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
DATE OF          NAME OF WARRANT RECIPIENT            NUMBER OF           EXERCISE PRICE
ISSUANCE                                              SHARES OF           EXPIRES
                                                     COMMON STOCK
----------------- -------------------------------- ----------------- ------------------------
<S>              <C>                               <C>               <C>
6/12/2000         Atlantis Capital Fund LTD        100,000           Exercise Price:  $1.00
                                                                     Expires 6/12/2005

6/12/2000         CALP II LP                        50,000           Exercise Price:  $1.00
                                                                     Expires 6/12/2005

6/12/2000         Cache Capital "USA" LP           139,500           Exercise Price:  $1.00
                                                                     Expires 6/12/2005

6/12/2000         Arab Commerce Bank                10,500           Exercise Price:  $1.00
                                                                     Expires 6/12/2005

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.2

INTERMEC DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

ACTION AND THIRD AMENDMENT

The undersigned authorized officers of Intermec, Inc. take the following actions and make the following amendments to the Intermec
Deferred Compensation Plan, As Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2008 (Plan), effective immediately:



| | 1. | Section 1.04 of the Plan shall be amended to reflect that the following entities have been authorized by the Plan Sponsor to participate in and have adopted the
Plan, provided that coverage under the Plan for employees of such additional Employers shall commence January 1, 2012:
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | a. | Vocollect, Inc.
| | -- | ---------------



| | b. | Vocollect Healthcare Systems, Inc.
| | -- | ----------------------------------



| | 2. | For the avoidance of doubt and notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary, only the following types of compensation may be deferred under the Plan, subject to such
additional limitations as are provided under the Plan:
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | a. | Base Pay
| | -- | --------



| | b. | Performance based annual bonuses
| | -- | --------------------------------



| | c. | Sales Commissions
| | -- | -----------------

In all other
respects, the terms of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

The foregoing actions are hereby taken on this 9th day
of June, 2011.



Intermec, Inc.By

/s/ Jeanne LyonJeanne Lyon Vice President,
Human ResourcesBy

/s/ Robert DriessnackRobert Driessnack Chief
Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lorenzo Ramsey, Appellant.

During the trial a ballistics expert testified that the revolver the defendant conceded he possessed was operable, and that when the expert test fired it twice, it discharged each time. The expert also testified that the revolver had a cylinder which did not lock into perfect alignment with the hammer and barrel but indicated that it could easily be made to align by using the free hand to move the cylinder slightly. The court’s initial charge to the jury in regard to criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was taken verbatim from 3CJI (NY) PL article 265 which includes the statutory definition of firearm (Penal Law § 265.00 [3]), but no instruction on operability. Upon the defense counsel’s exception to the absence of an instruction on operability, the court instructed the jury that a gun which cannot be fired does not fit within the statute. The defendant, who was charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and the third degree, was convicted only of the latter. On this appeal he contends that the charge was defective with respect to the operability of the revolver.

Although the trial court should have included in its initial charge to the jury an instruction to the effect that a firearm within the meaning of Penal Law § 265.00 (3) must be found operable *(see, People v Actie,*99 AD2d 815; *People v Grillo,*15 AD2d 502, 503, *affd*11 NY2d 841), we find, under the circumstances of this case, that the jury could gather from hearing the entire charge the correct rules to apply in arriving at its verdict *(see, People v Canty,*60 NY2d 830, 832; *People v Russell,*266 NY 147, 153). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors
SureBeam Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-101971, 333-101917 and 333-57534) on Form S-3 and Form S-8 of SureBeam
Corporation of our report dated March 25, 2003, with respect to the consolidated
balance sheets of SureBeam Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
(deficit), and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2002, and the
financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2002,
Annual Report on Form 10-K of SureBeam Corporation.


/s/ KPMG LLP


San Diego, California
March 28, 2003
**Exhibit
21**
 
 **SUBSIDIARIES
OF THE REGISTRANT**
 
 
 **Name**
    **State
      or County of Incorporation**Panhandle
      Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP
    DelawareTrunkline
      Gas Company, LLC
    DelawareTrunkline
      LNG Holdings, LLC
    DelawareTrunkline
      LNG Company, LLC
    DelawarePan
      Gas Storage, LLC
    DelawareCCE
      Acquisition, LLC
    Delaware
 
 Note:  Certain
wholly-owned subsidiaries of Southern Union Company are not named above.
Considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, these unnamed entities would
not constitute a "significant subsidiary" at the end of the year covered by this
report. Additionally, the Company has other subsidiaries that conduct no
business except to the extent necessary to maintain their corporate name or
existence.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. CP01-157-000]

Take notice that on April 16, 2001, Georgia-Pacific Corporation (Georgia-Pacific) filed a petition for a declaratory order in the above-styled proceeding, requesting that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issue an order declaring that a prospective lease or other long-term arrangement under which a third-party owner of an industrial facility has the right to a portion of the capacity of Georgia-Pacific's pipeline that crosses the Arkansas/Louisiana border: (1) Shall not constitute the transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce; and (2) shall not subject such pipeline to any greater Commission regulation or oversight than currently in place.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with §§ 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or before May 15, 2001. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a  party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at  http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-10584  Filed 4-27-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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

I, Gary Musselman,  the Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial  Officer of
Pacel  Corp.  (the  "Company"),   certify,   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  that to the best of my
knowledge:

1.       the  Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB for the  Company  for the period
         ended June 30, 2006 (the "Report) fully complies with the  requirements
         of Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15
         U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

2.       the  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.


Dated: August 15, 2006

/s/ GARY MUSSELMAN
---------------------------------------------------
Gary Musselman, President, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer








                                  End of Filing
- How To Appeal 
    - Court Forms  and Fees        - Court Forms
      - Fee Schedule
      - Filing Fee 
    - Court Rules and Procedures        - Rules of Practice  and Procedure
      - Procedural Requirements for Staff Conferences
      - Internal Operating Procedures
      - Rules of Admission  and Practice
      - Rules Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability
      - E-Filing Rules
      - Court Process
      - Court Efforts to Ensure Compliance with Court Rules 
    - Information About Practitioners        - Search List of Practitioners
      - Disciplinary Action
      - Key Points in Finding a Representative
      - Compendium of Disciplinary Grievances 
    - Orders and Opinions        - Miscellaneous Orders
      - Ceremonial Orders
      - Opinions and Full Court Orders
      - Search Decisions and Opinions
      - Recent Decisions / Opinions
      - Case Archives 
    - Active Panel Cases 
    - Stayed Cases 
    - Class Action Cases 
    - Electronic Filing 
    - Docket Search 
    - Oral Arguments        - Schedule
      - Oral Arguments via YouTube Live
      - Audio/Video
      - Oral Argument Educational Outreach 

(PDF)
(PDF)
Reports Training Manual (PDF)
Docketing Training Manual (PDF)

USCAVC 16thJudicial ConferenceSeptember 19-20, 2024

Watch CAVC Oral Arguments on YouTube

Changes to Court Rules Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability - EffectiveJanuary 10, 2024

In the News: Articles

----
<PAGE>   1
 
                                  EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                       REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
To the Board of Directors and
Shareholders of Printpack, Inc.
 
     In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheets and the related statements
of operations, of changes in shareholders' equity and of cash flows present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Printpack, Inc. (the
Company), as described in Note 1 to the financial statements, at June 29, 1996
and June 28, 1997, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each
of the three years in the period ended June 28, 1997, in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management; our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our
audits of these statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards which require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for the opinion expressed above.
 
     As discussed in Note 14, the Company changed its method of accounting for
postemployment benefits effective June 25, 1994.
 
/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP
 
Atlanta, Georgia
September 12, 1997
 
                                       45
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6257 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6257

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain emergency 
        medical devices from the excise tax on medical devices.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 29, 2010

  Mr. Turner introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain emergency 
        medical devices from the excise tax on medical devices.

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

SECTION 1. REPEALING FIRST RESPONDERS EMERGENCY MEDICAL EQUIPMENT TAX.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 4191(b) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
subparagraph (C), by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph 
(E), and by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(D) qualified emergency medical devices, and''.
    (b) Qualified Emergency Medical Device.--Subsection (b) of section 
4191 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(3) Qualified emergency medical device.--The term 
        `qualified emergency medical device' means any medical device 
        of a type furnished by first responders or ambulance services 
        in providing out-of-hospital or pre-hospital care, or transport 
        to a medical care facility, for individuals--
                    ``(A) with illnesses, injuries, or other medical 
                emergencies, or
                    ``(B) in need of medical transport, extrication, or 
                evacuation.''.
    (c) Certain Exemptions Made Applicable.--
            (1) The last sentence of subsection (a) of section 4221 of 
        such Code is amended by striking ``(4),''.
            (2) The last sentence of paragraph (2) of section 6416(b) 
        of such Code is amended by striking ``(C),''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to sales after December 31, 2012.
                                 <all>
```
- Home
- Visiting Capitol Hill
- Official Business

# Couriers & Packages

Couriers are prohibited from making deliveries directly to the U.S. Capitol, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, and Library of Congress. Couriers delivering sealed envelopes or packages to buildings in the U.S. Capitol Complex must do so via the Congressional Acceptance Site located at 160 D St. NE, Washington, DC 20510 (across the street from the U.S. Capitol Police Headquarters Building).  **Please note:** The Congressional Acceptance Site cannot accept any perishable deliveries (e.g. flowers, food, drink, etc.).  	The Congressional Acceptance Site will accept items from couriers with proper identification, (i.e., a valid driver's license), Monday – Friday, 8:30 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. When a courier makes a delivery to the Congressional Acceptance Site, each item will be logged-in (noting the date and time), x-rayed and screened for hazardous materials and substances. Packages no larger than 4" x 14" x18" will be accepted at the Congressional Acceptance Site for processing onsite. Larger packages delivered to the Congressional Acceptance Site will be redirected to an off-site mail processing center for inspection.	These procedures do not apply to United States Postal Service deliveries or deliveries from large commercial carriers such as Federal Express or United Parcel Service.  Deliveries from these carriers will continue to be processed at the off-site mail processing center.	NOTE: A courier may make a delivery of up to 10 items at any one time. For any delivery over 10 items, please contact the Congressional Acceptance Site staff at (202) 224-5600 for additional guidance.  Short-term parking for both cars and bikes is available at the Congressional Acceptance Site.  

## Visiting Capitol Hill

              - Visitor Information
              - Official Business
              - Activities Requiring Permits
              - Regulations & Prohibitions
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-20-00086-CR

EVELYN BRIDGES,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-386-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Evelyn Bridges appealed her conviction for Driving While Intoxicated. She has 

now filed a motion to dismiss her appeal. The motion is signed by both Bridges and her

attorney.

Accordingly, the motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.2(a).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice
Bridges v. State Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Appeal dismissed 

Opinion delivered and filed April 1, 2020

Do not publish 

[CR25]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD MORRISON,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. JOHN F. DIETZ; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 14

- 17414

D.C. No. 3:14

- cv
- 01604

- VC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Vince G. Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 13 , 2016 **

Before: HAWKINS, N.R. SMITH, and HURWITZ , Circuit Judges.
Richard Morrison appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismiss ing his 42 U.S .C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations arising from
the seizure and sale of his propert y. We have jurisdiction under 2 8 U.S.C. § 1291.

We review de novo

. Brayton Purcell LLP v. Recordon & Recordon , 606 F.3d

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 17414

1124, 1127 (9th Cir. 2010) ( dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction ); Rhoades v.

Avon Products, Inc ., 504 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir. 2007) (dismissal for failure to

state a claim under Federal Rule of Procedure 12(b)(6))

. We may affirm on any
basis supported by the record. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP , 534
F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action against defendant Neustrom
because Morrison failed to establish that the district court had specific personal
jurisdiction over him. See Walden v. Fiore , 134 S. Ct. 1115 , 1122

- 23 (2014) (the
relationship between the non

- resident defendant and the forum must arise out of

c ontacts that the defendant himself creates with the forum); Schwarzenegger v.

Fred Martin Motor Co ., 374 F.3d 797, 807 (9th Cir. 2004) (affirming dismissal of
complaint against non

- resident defendant for lack of personal jurisdiction because
he did not exp ressly aim any acts towards forum state ).

Dismissal of the action against defendants Dietz and Guidry was proper
because Morrison failed to allege facts sufficient to show that Dietz and Guidry

acted under color of state law. See Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co ., 457 U.S. 922,

940

- 41 (1982) (private misuse of a state statute is not act ionable under § 1983)

. We do not consider arguments that were not presented to the district court.3 14

- 17414

See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009) (declining to con sider

arguments not ra ised below).

AFFIRM ED

.
# First Responder Guide for Linking People to Substance Use Services

**Posted: Aug. 24, 2023**

            -   Find similar articles:
            - EMS
            - Health and safety

            - Share on:
            - 
            - 
            - 

Connecting Communities to Substance Use Services: Practical Tools for First Responders has been added to the Substance Use and Mental Health Services Administration Evidence-Based Resource Guide series.

The guide provides practical, evidenced-based information that first responder agencies, their partners and communities can use to implement or expand practices and approaches for linking people to substance use services. It presents relevant strategies and public health approaches, resources and program models, potential challenges, and other important factors to consider when implementing approaches to support people who use drugs.

## How it’s useful for first responders

During their day-to-day work, first responders such as firefighters, emergency medical services providers and law enforcement officers often encounter people who use drugs such as alcohol, opioids and stimulants. This guide helps first responders connect these people to substance use programs and resources so they can receive the assistance they may need.

This article is based on content in theAug. 24, 2023 InfoGram.

 Subscribe to the InfoGram