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


Exhibit 10.43

Sublease




Sublease agreement entered into between Motek Management, LLC. (Tenant), Xstream Beverage Network, Inc (Subtenant), and MZLTV, LTD. (Landlord).







1 

SUBLEASE PERIOD: The subtenant agrees to sublease from Tenant, property known as Suite 208 and 209 stipulated to consist of two rentable spaces on the second floor in the building located at 3511, West Commercial Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33309 as reflected in attached diagram.




The term of this lease shall be for a period of twelve (12) months commencing on

the twentieth  day of December 2005 and ending on the last day of 

December, 2006.




Subtenant agrees to pay monthly to the Tenant base rental for the Demised Premises, for the full term hereof the total sum of Fifteen Thousand and 00 cents ($15,000) plus sales tax, to be paid in equal monthly installments of One thousand two hundred fifty ($1250.00) Dollars plus sales tax on the first  day of January, 2006 and each month thereafter. The first monthly rental payment shall be due and payable upon the execution of this lease,




2.

ADDITIONAL RENT: The Subtenant shall pay, as additional rent ten (10%) percent of the electric bill for the second floor. Tenant shall pay for all other utilities and   increases required in the Master Lease.




3.

TERM OF SUBLEASE: The Subtenant agrees to comply with all terms and conditions of the lease entered into by the Tenant, including the prompt payment of all rents. The lease terms are incorporated into this agreement by reference.




4.

SECURITY DEPOSIT: The Subtenant agrees to pay to Tenant the sum of one thousand two hundred fifty ($1250.00) Dollars as a security deposit, to be promptly returned upon the termination of this sublease and compliance of all conditions of this sublease.




In addition, last month rent ($1250.00) One thousand two hundred fifty dollars plus sales tax at execution of the sublease.




5.

SERVICES BY TENANT: The Tenant shall provide to the Subtenant the following:




a)

Four (4) telephone instruments.

b)

Wired for network.

c)

Internet Broad band access for a $75 a month.

d)

Four (4) Desks.

e)

Four (4) Guest Chairs.

f)

Four (4) Executive Chairs.

g)

Access to Conference Room.








6.

LANDLORD’S CONSENT: The Landlord consents to this sublease and agrees promptly notif~’ the Tenant if the Subtenant is in broach of this agreement. Nothing herein shall constitute a release of Tenant who shall remain bound under this lease. Nothing herein shall constitute a consent to any further Sublease or Assignment of Lease.




7.

TERMINATION OF SUBLEASE: Tenant and sub-tenant has the right to terminate this sublease with written notice sixty(60) days prior to termination.







		
	DATE:

	WITNESS:


	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	Jerome Pearring

	Hillel Bronstein


	Xstream Beverage Network, Inc..

	MZLTV, LTD


	Subtenant

	Landlord


	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	Hillel Bronstein


	 	Motek Managment


	 	Tenant
Exhibit 31.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





I, Michael Hull, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of GelTech Solutions, Inc.; and





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







Date: March 21, 2012
By:
/s/ Michael HullMichael HullChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
Motion Granted; Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 27 , 20 12

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00 061

- CR NO. 14

- 12

- 00 062

- CR NO. 14

- 12

- 00 063

- CR

____________ DONALD RAY BEATY , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 258th District Court

Polk County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 21589, 21665, & 21 , 940



### MEMORANDUM OP IN ION Appellant entered guilty pleas, without agreed recommendations on punishment, to two charges of possession of methamphetamine, and a single charge of evading arrest. The trial court sentenced appellant on December 6, 2011, to confinement in the
Institutio nal Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for ten years in each case, with the sentences to be served concurrently. A written request to withdraw the notice of appeal, personally signed by appel lant, has been filed with this c ourt in each c ase

.2

See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this c ourt has not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant ’ s motions

. Accordingly, we order the ap peal s dismissed. We direct the clerk of the c ou rt to issue the mandate s of the c ourt immediately.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Jamison and McCally

. Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App. P. 4 7.2(b)

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

CHRISTOPHER BUCKREIS,

Petitioner

v.

ROBIN G. PATTON, IN THEIR OFFICIAL 

CAPACITY,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 85 WM 2020

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of November, 2020, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED.
Case 1:07-cv-05836-LAP Document 6 Filed 08/17/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05836-LAP Document 6 Filed 08/17/2007 Page 2 of 2
# C_2018436EN.01005001.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2018 — Weber-Stephen Products v EUIPO (iGrill)

(Case T-822/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark iGrill - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 436/70)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Weber-Stephen Products LLC (Palatine, Illinois, United States) (represented by: R. Niebel and A. Jauch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 September 2017 (Case R 579/2017-2), relating to an application for registration of the word sign iGrill as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Weber-Stephen Products LLC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Weber-Stephen Products LLC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 63, 19.2.2018.

---
A92A1027.

#### RADFORD v. THE STATE.

(422 SE2d 72)

Johnson, Judge.

Arthur Radford appeals from his conviction for use of a license *380plate to conceal or misrepresent the identity of a vehicle and no proof of insurance.

1. Radford asserts 15 enumerations of error. The record on appeal discloses no motions or objections below preserving the issues now raised by Radford’s first, second, third, eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth enumerations of error. “We may not decide issues raised for the first time on appeal. [Cits.]” *Weaver v. State,*200 Ga. App. 82 (1) (406 SE2d 574) (1991).

2. Radford contends in his fourth enumeration that the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence two purported photographs of his automobile taken after it was impounded. This contention is without merit.

“Before a photograph may be introduced in evidence, it must be authenticated by a showing that it is a fair and truthful representation of what it purports to depict. The quantum of evidence required to sufficiently identify photographs as true and accurate representations of what they purport to depict is a matter to be left within the discretion of the trial court.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) *Mattarochia v. State,*200 Ga. App. 681, 683 (4) (409 SE2d 546) (1991). Here, Radford attempted to authenticate the purported photographs of his automobile, taken after it was impounded, through the testimony of the arresting officer. The officer testified that he never saw the vehicle after it was impounded. Consequently, this officer could not testify that the photographs were true and accurate representations of what they purported to depict. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit the photographs into evidence.

3. Radford’s fourteenth enumeration of error is that there was insufficient evidence at trial to support the jury’s verdict. Reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, we conclude that a rational trier of fact could have found Radford guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of use of a license plate to conceal or misrepresent the identity of a vehicle and no proof of insurance. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

4. Radford argues in his fifteenth enumeration of error that his sentence is excessive. As to each count, Radford was sentenced to serve 12 months concurrent probation and to pay a $500 fine. The court ordered the probation to be terminated upon payment of the fines. “This court is not empowered to modify a sentence which is within the statutory limits for the offense. Any question as to the ex-cessiveness of a sentence, which in this case was within the legal limits, should be addressed to the appropriate sentence review panel.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) *Thomas v. State,*199 Ga. App. 818 (406 SE2d 811) (1991).

5. Radford’s remaining enumerations of error are without merit.

*381Decided September 8, 1992.

Arthur A. Radford, *pro se.*

*Gerald N. Blaney, Jr., Solicitor, David M. Fuller, Assistant Solicitor,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Carley, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.*
# C_2019206EN.01004001.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Rustproof System ADAPTA)

(Case T-226/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark Rustproof system ADAPTA - Partial declaration of invalidity by the Board of Appeal - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) - No distinctive character acquired by use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Infringement of the right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)

(2019/C 206/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Adapta Color, SL (Peñiscola, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Coatings Foreign IP Co. LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: A. Rajendra, Solicitor, and by S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2017 (Case R 2408/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Coatings Foreign IP and Adapta Color.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Adapta Color, SL to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Adapta Color, SL to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.

---
Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH     Document 19      Filed 08/13/2007     Page 1 of 1
February 26, 2007

Ms. Eileen A. Donovan

Acting Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Center

1155 21* Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Reference File # 2768.01
Rule Certification
Dear Ms. Donovan:

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(a), the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT®) hereby
submits the following:

- Early listing of February through December 2009 Ethanol futures.
These futures contracts ordinarily would be authorized for trading later during 2007 and 2008.
Due to customer demand, the Exchange intends to list these contracts earlier than usual (i.e., as
of February 27, 2007).
This is a one-time change, rather than a permanent revision, in the Exchange’s listing cycle.

There were no opposing views with respect to this action.

The CBOT certifies that this action complies with the Commodity Exchange Act and the rules
thereunder.

Sincerely,

Paul J. Draths
Vice President and Secretary
Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 5 Filed 11/02/2007 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 5 Filed 11/02/2007 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 5 Filed 11/02/2007 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit
32.2





Certification of Principal
Financial 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 Quarterly Report
of SRKP 16, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Anthony C. Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
      C. Pintsopoulos
              Principal
      Financial Officer
              July
      26, 2010
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 this Quarterly Report of Steele Recording Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mack Steele, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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.



By:   /s/ Mack Steele

Mack Steele

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Accounting Officer



Dated: August 1, 2007
Case 1:07-cv-05302-AKH Document 32 Filed 10/26/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05302-AKH Document 32 Filed 10/26/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05302-AKH Document 32 Filed 10/26/2007 Page 3 of 3
# C_2018094EN.01002701.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/27

---

Order of the General Court of 18 January 2018 — W&O medical esthetics GmbH v EUIPO — Fidia farmaceutici (HYALSTYLE)

(Case T-178/17) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark HYALSTYLE - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Request for the hearing of witnesses - Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded in law))

(2018/C 094/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: W&O medical esthetics GmbH (Oberursel, Germany) (represented by: A. Finkentey, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Fidia farmaceutici SpA (Abano Terme, Italy) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein and H. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 January 2017 (Case R 872/2016-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between W&O medical esthetics and Fidia farmaceutici.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | W&O medical esthetics GmbH shall bear its own costs and those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and of Fidia farmaceutici SpA. |
| --- | --- |

2.

W&O medical esthetics GmbH shall bear its own costs and those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and of Fidia farmaceutici SpA.

---

(1)  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.

1

---
NUMBER 13-19-00588-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF A.L. AND K.L., CHILDREN

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 5 of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

Appellant, Jessica Barrera-Lazo, perfected her appeal from a judgment entered by 

the County Court at Law No. 5 in Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 2019-FAM60110-5. Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds 

that it is moot. Appellant requests that this Court dismiss the appeal.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s motion to 

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a). Appellant’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby 

DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent 
2

agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having 

dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, 

and our mandate will issue forthwith. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

GINA M. BENAVIDES,

Justice

Delivered and filed the 

16th day of January, 2020.
**EXHIBIT
       1**





**FORM
      OF SUBSCRIPTION**





**(To
      be signed only upon exercise of Warrant)**





To:
      Ariel
      Way, Inc.





(1)  The
      undersigned Warrant Holder hereby elects to purchase  shares
      of
      Common Stock of Ariel Way, Inc. (the “ ***Warrant
      Stock*** ”),
      pursuant to the terms of the attached Warrant, and tenders herewith payment
      of
      the purchase price for such shares in full or accepts cancellation of
      indebtedness of the Company to the Warrant Holder of the same equal amount.





(2)  In
      exercising the Warrant, the undersigned Warrant Holder hereby confirms and
      acknowledges that the representations and warranties set forth in Section 5
      of the Warrant as they apply to the undersigned Warrant Holder continue to
      be
      true and correct as of this date.





(3)  Please
      issue a certificate or certificates representing such shares of Warrant Stock
      in
      the name specified below:





(Name)(Address)(City,
                State, Zip Code)(Federal
                Tax Identification Number)(Date)
Case 1:07-cv-05559-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05559-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05559-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05559-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 21

# List of Subsidiaries
of Image Sensing Systems, Inc.

|Name of Subsidiaries                 | Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization
|------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------
|                                     |                                              
|Flow Traffic Ltd.                    |                                              
|                                     |                                              
|                                    
|Image Sensing Systems Europe Limited |                                              

32

---
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.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

## Deletion of Agenda Item From May 10th Open Meeting

The following item has been deleted from the list of agenda items scheduled for consideration at the May 10, 2001, Open Meeting and previously listed in the Commission's Notice of May 3, 2001.

# Item No: 

2.

# Bureau: 

Mass Media.

# Subject: 

 

# Title: 

Cross-Ownership of Broadcast Stations and Newspapers; and Newspaper/Radio Cross-Ownership Waiver Policy (MM Docket No. 96-197).

# Summary: 

The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rule Making proposing to modify, eliminate, or retain its rule that prohibits common ownership of broadcast stations and newspapers within the same geographic area. 

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-12157 Filed 5-10-01; 9:58 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
Case 1:07-cv-05911-RMB Document 2 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05911-RMB Document 2 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05911-RMB Document 2 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 3 of 3
# C_2018445EN.01001601.xml

| 10.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 445/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 445/16

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2018 — Grupo Orenes v EUIPO — Akamon Entertainment Millenium (Bingo VIVA! Slots)

(Case T-63/17) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark Bingo VIVA! Slots - Earlier European Union figurative mark vive bingo - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Subject matter of the dispute))

(2018/C 445/20)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Orenes (Murcia, Spain) (represented by: M. J. Sanmartín Sanmartín, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Akamon Entertainment Millenium (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 November 2016 (Case R 453/2016-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Grupo Orenes and Akamon Entertainment Millenium.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Grupo Orenes to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Grupo Orenes to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 27.3.2017.

---