alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1





FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE




THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE (this "Amendment") is made and entered into as of June 30, 2010 by and between COVENANT GROUP OF CHINA INC., a Nevada corporation (the "Maker"), and SUI GENERIS CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Payee" and, collectively with Maker, the “Parties”).




BACKGROUND




A.          On April 22, 2010, Maker and Payee executed a Promissory Note, whereby Maker promised to repay the principal sum of $120,000 in connection with a Bridge Loan Agreement entered into by the Parties of even date (the "Original Note").




B.           Maker and Payee now desire to amend the Original Note as set forth herein.




NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:




1.  All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Original Note.




2.  The last sentence of paragraph 1 of the Original Note reading, “In addition, Payee will receive upon signing of this Note Two-Hundred Thousand (200,000) restricted common stock shares of Maker[,]” is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:




“In addition, Payee will receive upon signing of this Note a warrant to purchase up to Fourteen-Thousand Four-Hundred (14,400) shares of restricted common stock of Maker at a Three Dollar ($3.00) strike price, exercisable by Payee within two years of the date of this Note first set forth above.”





3.  Except as expressly modified in this Amendment, all of the remaining terms and conditions of the Original Note shall continue in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed.




[signature page follows]









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of the date first written above.






COVENANT GROUP OF CHINA INC.By:
/s/ Justin D.CsikJustin D. Csik, CFO and General Counsel





SUI GENERIS CAPITAL PARTNERS LLCBy:
/s/ RobertBenedictRobert Benedict, Managing Member
##### 



EXHIBIT 21
 SUBSIDIARIES OF AMERIGAS PARTNERS, L.P.
 SUBSIDIARY
    
    OWNERSHIP
    
    STATE OF INCORPORATIONAmeriGas Finance Corp
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAmeriGas Eagle Finance Corp.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAP Eagle Finance Corp.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAmeriGas Propane L.P.
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    DelawareAmeriGas Propane Parts & Service, Inc.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    PennsylvaniaAmeriGas Eagle Propane, L.P.
    
    
    (2
    )
    
    DelawareAmeriGas Eagle Parts & Service, Inc.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    PennsylvaniaAmeriGas Eagle Propane, Inc.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAmerE Holdings, Inc.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAmeriGas Eagle Holdings, Inc.(3)
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareActive Propane of Wisconsin, LLC
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Delaware
 (1)
    
    AmeriGas Propane, Inc. is the general partner owning 1.01%; AmeriGas Partners, L.P.
holds all limited partner interests owning 98.9899%(2)
    
    99% owned by AmeriGas Propane, L.P. and <0.5% owned by AmeriGas Eagle Holdings, Inc.
(GP) and an unrelated third party(3)
    
    AmeriGas Eagle Holdings, Inc. owns <0.5% as General Partner of AmeriGas Eagle
Propane, L.P.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1200 

CA 14-00773 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND SCONIERS, JJ. 

 

PREMIER CAPITAL, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KENT R. DEHAAN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

LECLAIR RYAN, P.C., ROCHESTER (MICHAEL J. CROSNICKER OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

LANCE J. MARK, PLLC, MEDINA (LANCE J. MARK OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme

Court, Monroe County (John J. Ark, J.), entered July 24, 2013. The 

judgment and order, insofar as appealed from, denied that part of the

motion of plaintiff for summary judgment, granted the cross motion of

defendant for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment and order insofar as

appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the

cross motion is denied, the complaint is reinstated and that part of

the motion seeking summary judgment is granted, and the matter is

remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for entry of a renewal

judgment in favor of plaintiff. 

Memorandum: On a prior appeal, this Court concluded that

plaintiff, as assignee of a default judgment entered against

defendant, “was entitled to commence an action for a renewal judgment

without permission pursuant to CPLR 5014 (1)” (Chase Lincoln First

Bank, N.A. v DeHaan, 89 AD3d 1476, 1477). While that appeal was

pending, plaintiff commenced such an action, and thereafter moved,

inter alia, for summary judgment. We conclude that Supreme Court

erred in denying plaintiff’s motion insofar as it sought summary

judgment and granting defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment

dismissing the complaint, and we therefore remit the matter to Supreme

Court for entry of a renewal judgment in favor of plaintiff.

Plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of

law “by demonstrating the existence of the prior judgment, that the

defendant was the judgment debtor, that the judgment was docketed at

least nine years prior to the commencement of th[e] action, and that

the judgment remains . . . unsatisfied” (Rose v Gulizia, 104 AD3d 757,

758; see CPLR 5014; Premier Capital, LLC v Best Traders, Inc., 88 AD3d

677, 678). In opposition, defendant failed to raise a triable issue
-2- 1200 

CA 14-00773 

of fact (see Pangburn v Klug, 244 AD2d 394, 395; see generally

Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). We reject

defendant’s contention that the action is barred by laches inasmuch as

“laches is an equitable defense which is unavailable [here, i.e.,] in

an action at law commenced within the period of limitation” (Premier

Capital, LLC, 88 AD3d at 678). Finally, contrary to defendant’s

further contention, plaintiff’s commencement of another action seeking

identical relief did not implicate the doctrine of election of

remedies (see generally Matter of City of Syracuse v Fitch St. Props.,

LLC, 71 AD3d 1388, 1389). 

Entered: November 21, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 967 

To enhance airline passenger protection when the Secretary of Transportation 

issues a rule to require airline emergency contingency plans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2009 

Mrs. SCHMIDT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To enhance airline passenger protection when the Secretary 

of Transportation issues a rule to require airline emergency contingency plans. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROTECTION FOR PASSENGERS OF FOREIGN 

4 AIR TRANSPORTATION. 

5 When the Secretary of Transportation issues a rule 

6 enhancing airline passenger protection by requiring airline 

7 emergency contingency plans, the Secretary shall include 

8 in such a rule a requirement that the owner or operator 

9 of an airport, including a reliever airport, that serves air 

10 carriers and foreign air carriers shall coordinate with the 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 967 IH

1 United States Customs and Border Protection to ensure 

2 that adequate resources and personnel are available to 

3 process passengers arriving into or departing from the 

4 United States in the event of a tarmac delay. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

April 30, 2012

 

Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

Franco Bertone, the Chief Executive Officer and Adrián Calaza, the Chief Financial Officer of Telecom Argentina S.A. (“Telecom”) each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

 

1.              this Annual Report on Form 20-F (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 Telecom.

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Franco Bertone     |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|   |   | Name:                    | Franco   Bertone |
|   |   | Title:                   | Chief   Executive Officer |
|   |   |                     |   |
|   |   |                     |   |
|   | By:    | /s/   Adrián Calaza |
|   |   | Name:                    | Adrián   Calaza |
|   |   | Title:                   | Chief   Financial Officer |

 

----
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2391 

To amend the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to provide investment authority 

to support rural infrastructure development, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 29, 2019 

Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia (for himself and Mr. RIGGLEMAN) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to provide 

investment authority to support rural infrastructure development, 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 ‘‘Improving Rural Ac5 cess to Power Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS THAT SUPPORT 

7 RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT. 

8 Section 11 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (12 

9 U.S.C. 1431) is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2391 IH

1 ‘‘(m) COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS THAT SUPPORT

2 RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT.—Each Fed3 eral Home Loan Bank is authorized to purchase invest4 ment-grade securities from nonmember lenders that are 

5 organized as cooperatives and that have received financing 

6 from the Federal Financing Bank and that have dem7 onstrated experience in making loans to cooperatives that 

8 are eligible to receive loans or commitments for loans from 

9 the Rural Utilities Service (or any successor agency). Such 

10 securities shall be secured investments collateralized by 

11 loans of the cooperative lender. The purchase of such secu12 rities shall be at the sole discretion of each Federal Home 

13 Loan Bank, consistent with such regulations, restrictions, 

14 and limitations as may be prescribed by the Agency.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.01    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 Pacific Blue Energy Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joel Franklin, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (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/ Joel Franklin By: Joel Franklin Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Dated: May 11, 2010  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
H. Res. 107 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 4, 2009. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 

2) to amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend 

and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and 

for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and 

to consider in the House, without intervention of any point 

of order except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI, a 

motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall 

be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one 

hour equally divided among and controlled by the chair and 

ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce and the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Ways and Means. The previous question shall 
2 

•HRES 107 EH 

be considered as ordered on the motion to adoption without 

intervening motion. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 30182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14014]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1962-000 California]


Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Availability of Final 
Environmental Assessment

May 30, 2001.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) 
regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 F.R. 47897), the Office 
of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for license for the 
Rock Creek-Cresta Hydroelectric Project, located on the North Fork 
Feather River in Butte and Plumas Counties, California, and has 
prepared a Final environmental Assessment (FEA) for the project. About 
228 acres of the project occupy federal lands, managed by the U.S. 
Forest Service as part of the Plumas National Forest.
    The FEA contains the staff's analysis of the potential 
environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the 
project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not 
constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the 
quality of the human environment.
    Copies of the FEA are available for review at the Commission's 
Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, or by calling (202) 208-1371. The FEA may be viewed on the web 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims htm (call (202) 208-2222 for 
assistance).
    For further information, contact Dianne Rodman at (202) 219-2830.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-14014 Filed 6-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM

We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-136361 and 333-157777) and on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-55329,
33-63805, 333-04099, 333-07385, 333-65227, 333-71259, 333-71355, 333-74229,
333-75819, 333-90381, 333-44766, 333-52840, 333-66978, 333-68594, 333-100624,
333-106566, 333-112267, 333-128531, 333-129872, 333-147399, 333-148672 and
333-153636) of Medtronic, Inc. of our report dated June 18, 2009 relating to
the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting, which appears in Exhibit 13 to this Form 10-K. We
also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated June 18,
2009 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form
10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
June 23, 2009

Report of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm on
Financial Statement Schedule

To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Medtronic, Inc.:

Our
audits of the consolidated financial statements and of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting referred to in our report dated June
18, 2009 appearing in the 2009 Exhibit 13 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Medtronic, Inc. (which report and consolidated financial statements are
included in Exhibit 13 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K) also included an
audit of the financial statement schedule listed in Item 15(a)(2) of this Form
10-K. In our opinion, this financial statement schedule presents fairly, in all
material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction
with the related consolidated financial statements.

PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
June 18, 2009

---
### TEXA S COU RT O F AP PEAL S, THIR D DISTRIC T, AT AU STIN NO. 03-01-00003-CR

Fr eder ick E arl Washington, App ell ant v. The State of Texas , Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF BASTROP COUNTY, 21S T JUDICIAL DIST RICT

NO. 9560, HO NORABLE JO HN L. PLACKE, JUDG E PRESIDING Appe llantFred eri

ck Ear l W as hi ng ton w ascon

vi cte d of r o bbe r y af

t er pl ea di ng gu ilt y. See Te x. P en. Code A

nn . § 29.02(We st 1994 ). His so le co nt ent ion o n app eal is t hat t he fo rt y-five ye ar sentence i

mposed b y the court is unauthorized b

y l aw and v oid. We agree. The indict ment al

l eg ed two pr ev i ous f el ony con vi cti ons f or th e p urp ose

of enhanc ing pu n i sh men t. See id. § 12.42(d) (West Supp. 2001) . On October 11, 2000, when Washi ngt o n appear ed be f

oreth e d i str i ct c our t an d p l eade d g

ui l ty to th e a l l eg ed rob b er y , th e p ar ti es ag re ed to re ser ve th e enha

nc em en t i ss uef or th e s en ten ci ng he ari ng . Wi th th at, th e c ourt f oun d Was hi ng ton guil ty an d reset the cause f

or sentenci

ng. W as hi ng ton returned to court on Nov em ber 28. He d id no t ent er a plea t o t he enhanc ement al le gations, the State offered no e vidence t o p ro ve t he enha ncement allegat ions, and t he co urt d id not find the enhancement allegat ions to be tr ue. U nder t he circumstances, a ppellant’s sentence was not subj ect t o e nh ance ment. In fac t , t he co ur t ’s wr itt en judg ment r eflect s t hat no2

fi ndi ng was m ade regar di ng th e en ha nc em en t al l egati ons. Neverthel

ess, the di strict court assess ed pun i sh men t at im pri sonm en t for f orty-f i ve years . Robb ery i s a s econ

d-deg ree f elony . Id . § 29. 02(b). Washin gto n’s f o rt y-fi ve y

ear sentence exce ed s th

at a uthori ze d f ora se cond-degre e f

elony . Id . § 12.33 (West 1994). A sentence not authorized by

la w i s void . Levy v. Sta te , 81 8 S. W.2d 801 , 80 2 (T ex. Cr im . App . 19 91) ; B ro wn v. State , 14 S. W. 3d 83 2, 83 3 ( T ex . Ap p. —A us t in 200 0, p et . r ef’d); see Ex parte Seidel , 39 S.W.3d 221, 22 5 n.4

(Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Therefore, we a ffi rm t he dist rict co ur t ’s judg ment a s t o t he finding of g uilt, but re ver se t hat po rt ion o f the judg ment impo sing sent ence and re mand t he ca us e f or r ea ss es sme nt o f p un ish men t wit hin t he r an ge pr es cr ibe d f o ra s ec o nd - de gr ee fe lo ny.

__________________________________________ Bea An n Sm ith, Justice Bef ore Justices K

idd, B. A . Smi

th and Pury

ear Af f i rmed i n Pa rt, Reverse d an

d Rem anded i n Pa rt File d: Septembe

r 20, 2001 Do No t Publis

h
Exhibit 10.1


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1


TO


AMENDED AND RESTATED


REINSURANCE AND POOLING AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS,
Zenith Insurance Company (“Zenith”), ZNAT Insurance Company (“ZNAT”) and Zenith
Star Insurance Company (“Zenith Star”) have previously entered into an Amended
and Restated Reinsurance and Pooling Agreement, effective April 1, 2005, and;


 


WHEREAS,
effective June 30, 2005 Zenith Star has merged with Zenith, and no longer
exists as a corporate entity;


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, Zenith and ZNAT agree as follows:


 


1.                                       Article
V – Proportionate Shares – is deleted and the following substituted therefor:


 


“V.                             Proportionate
Shares.


 


The results of underwriting operations will be apportioned
cumulatively, without restatement of prior periods.  The proportionate shares of the Companies are
as follows:


 




	
  Zenith Insurance Company

  	
   

  	
  98.0

  	
  %

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  ZNAT
  Insurance Company

  	
   

  	
  2.0

  	
  %

  






 


The proportionate shares of Zenith and ZNAT may be changed from time to
time by mutual consent as of the close of any calendar year quarter.  Such changes shall be set forth in an
amendment to this Agreement.”


 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, each of the undersigned parties has caused this Amendment to be
executed on its behalf this 15th day of September, 2005.


 


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  ZENITH
  INSURANCE COMPANY

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Diane
  Heidenreich

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Jack D. Miller

  	
   

  
	
  Witness –
  Diane Heidenreich

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jack D. Miller, President

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  ZNAT INSURANCE COMPANY

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Diane
  Heidenreich

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Jack D. Miller

  	
   

  
	
  Witness –
  Diane Heidenreich

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jack D. Miller, President
----

----

|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                               |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:    August 13, 2010  | /s/ William Elder                                     |
|                                               | William Elder                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
|                                               | Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |

----