alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2009052EN.01S00301.xml

| 25.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 52/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 52/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
State of North Carolina v. Robert Lee Baker, Jr.

No. 203P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

Nicholas C. Woomer-Deters, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Baker, Robert Lee (Jr.).

Michael E. Bulleri, Assistant Attorney General, James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 24th of May 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."
ACTS RETIREMENT-LIFE COMMUNITIES, INC. v. TOWN OF COLUMBUS

334PA16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 8, 2018

Ryan D. Bolick, Attorney at Law, Virginia M. Wooten, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Town of Columbus, North Carolina.

Benjamin R. Sullivan, Jr., Attorney at Law, Charles C. Meeker, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for ACTS Retirement-Life Communities, Inc.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 5th of January 2018 by Defendant:

*441"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of January 2018."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 15th day of January 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
Exhibit 32.2

Section 906 CFO Certification

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 Colony Resorts LVH Acquisitions, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Robert Schaffhauser, Executive Vice President of Finance, respectively, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|/s/ Robert Schaffhauser            
|Robert Schaffhauser                
|Executive Vice President of Finance



May 15, 2006



- 26 -
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 1199

KATHERINE HARRIS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. CABARRUS COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, a body corporate; UNION COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, a body corporate; CHARLOTTE

MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION, a body corporate; STANLY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, a body corporate; ALBEMARLE CITY SCHOOLS BOARD OF EDUCATION, a body corporate; NORTH CAROLINA RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR TEACHERS AND STATE EMPLOYEES BOARD OF TRUSTEES ; BARRY SHEPHERD, in his individual capacity; KATHRYN AUGER, in her individual capacity; GARY AUSTIN, in his individual capacity , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Gre ensboro

. Catherine C. Eagles , District Judge. ( 1:16

- cv
- 00702

- CCE

- JEP )

Submitted : May 25 , 2017 Decided: May 30, 2017

Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Katherine Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Robert J. King, III, Daniel F. E. Smith, BROOKS, PIERCE, MC LENDON, HUMPHREY & LEONARD, LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina; Terry LaMonte Wallace, WALLACE CHILDERS PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Kirk London Bowling, BOWLI NG LAW FIRM, PLLC, Albemarle, North Carolina; Robert Michael Curran, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Katherine Harris appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint
as time

- barred . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harris v. Cabarrus Cty. Bd. of
Educ. , No. 1:16

- cv
- 00702

- CCE

- JEP (M.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 2017) . We deny Harris’ motion to amend her complaint. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Non. E. B. Lewis

County Attorney Cherokee County Rusk, Texas Dear Sir: Opinion ~No.‘o-1257 Re: Appointment by.'widow bf brother of her deceased,

husband; a&withIn th6,Nepotcsm Law.> : Wis ~h&veyour ,telegraphi'& I??tifiesF.?;,of

August 7, 1939, in which you ask,the following questf6h: ',
.. .~

Where the sheriff of Cherokee County was killed, his widow appointed to fill his unexpired term, there being no children; may the widow appoint her deceased husband's brother as deputy sheriff?

Article 432, Penal Code,~1925, the so-called "Nepotism" Law, reads as follows:

,"No officer of this State or any officer ~~ of any district, county, city, precinct, school district,nor other munlciptil kubdiylslon,of this State, or any officer or member of any State, district, county, city3 school district or other municipal board, or judge of any court, created by ,orunder authority of any general or special law of this State, or any member ,ofthe Legislature, shall appoint, or vote for, or confirm the appointment to any office, po: sition, clerkship, employment or duty, of any person related within the second degree by affinity or within the third degree by consanguinity to the person so appointing or so voting, or to any other member of any sudh board, the Legislature, or court of which such person so appointing or voting may be a member, when the salary, fees, or compensation of such appointee is to be paid for, directly or indirectly, out of or from public funds or fees of office of any kind or character whatsoever."

### 247

.Hon. E. B. Lewis, Page #t.

The rollowingquotation taken rr0m the aase or Leafs vs. GIRalr,130 S. W. **(2df** 

### 919, by the Austin Court of CivilAppeals,governsthe detera&natlonor this question:

-Death of the spoaaeterminateathe relationshipby afrinity;if, however, the marriage has resultedin issuewho are still living,the relationship

by affinityoontlnuea.* See also StrlngrallOw ~8. State, 42 Tax~*Or., Rep. 504, 61 S. VI.

719; 2 C.J. p. 379. Since you state that there were no lab& ~rr&i'tlia union 

### of the deceased sharlff**and** 

### hla widow,whanaw.ea~was sheriffby appointment, the widow is no longer related by afrlnltyto the brother of her deoeaaedhusband,and, 

### therefore,she may appoint tha brother of har deoaaaad husbandas a deputy 

### sheriff,ulthoutviolatingthe Provlaions of Artiole 432, Penal Code, quoted above. Yours 

### gery truly ATTORNEY 

### GZNERAL OF TBXAS

R. W. Palrahlld Aaalatant RpJFxpbp 

### APPROVEUAUG19; 1939

ATTORREYGENERALOP TEXAS
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 424 

To include the county of Mohave, in the State of Arizona, as an affected 

area for purposes of making claims under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act based on exposure to atmospheric nuclear testing. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 25, 2013 

Mr. GOSAR (for himself and Mr. FRANKS of Arizona) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To include the county of Mohave, in the State of Arizona, 

as an affected area for purposes of making claims under 

the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act based on exposure to atmospheric nuclear testing. 

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 ‘‘Mohave County Radi5 ation Compensation Act of 2013’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 424 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCLUSION UNDER THE RADIATION EXPOSURE 

2 COMPENSATION ACT. 

3 Section 4(b)(1)(C) of the Radiation Exposure Com4 pensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended by insert5 ing ‘‘Mohave,’’ after ‘‘Apache,’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7036** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. RONALD ELZEY, a/k/a Duff , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore
. William D. Quarles, Jr. , District Judge. ( 1:09

- cr - 00288

- WDQ

- 11; 1:12

- cv - 01823

- WDQ )

Submitted : August 29, 2013 Decided: September 4, 2013

Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Ronald Elzey, Appellant Pro Se. Antonio J. Reynolds, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ronald Elzey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2013 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 2 8 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfi es this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (200 3). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Elzey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
H. R. 4416 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

An Act 

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 161 

Live Oak Street in Miami, Arizona, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza 

Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT MANUEL V. MENDOZA POST OFFICE 

BUILDING. 

(a) REDESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 161 Live Oak Street in Miami, Arizona, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza 

Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 10 39

In re: DEANDRE JOHNSON , Petitioner

.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus . ( 2:2 1

- cv - 00 511

- RAJ

- LRL )

Submitted : February 21 , 2023 Decided: February 24, 2023

Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ , Circuit Judge s , and MOTZ , Senior Circuit Judge

.
Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Deandre Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1039 Doc: 11 Filed: 02/24/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Deandre Johnson petitions for a writ of mandamus , seeking an order directing the district court to grant relief on his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition

. We conclude that Johnson is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief i s a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. , 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004) ; In re Murphy

- Brown,
LLC , 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018) . Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner “has no other adequate means to attain the relief [he] desires” and demonstrates “a clear and indisputable right” to that relief. Murphy

- Brown , 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). The relief sought by Johnson is not availa ble by way of mandamus. A ccordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. W e dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional p rocess. PETITION DENIED USCA4 Appeal: 23-1039 Doc: 11 Filed: 02/24/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
<PAGE> 1
                          LEASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT

                               MITY-LITE, INC.




     THIS LEASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (the "Lease Amendment") is made and
entered into as of this 31st day of October, 1996 and represents amendments to
the LEASE AGREEMENT dated the 31st day of March, 1995, by and between the
Walter M. and Orpha M. Lewis Family Trust (the "Landlord") and Mity-Lite,
Inc., a Utah corporation (the "Tenant").

     The following amendments, as listed by section to the original lease
agreement, are being executed:

     1. PREMISES

        1.1  Description of the Premises.  The approximate square feet of the
    leased premises has been increased from 46,200 to 67,700. 

     2. BASIC RENTAL PAYMENTS; DEPOSIT

        2.1  Basic Annual Rent.  The Basic Monthly Rental amount is increased
    from $11,640 to $17,100.  


MITY-LITE, INC.                   WALTER M. and ORPHA M. LEWIS FAMILY TRUST


/s/ Bradley T Nielson             /s/ Walter M. Lewis, Trustee
--------------------------        -----------------------------------
Bradley T Nielson                 Walter M. Lewis, Trustee
Chief Financial Officer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1098 KA 09-01279 PRESENT: FAHEY, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

VERNON L. CARTER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES ECKERT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

VERNON L. CARTER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (MATTHEW DUNHAM OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Richard A. Keenan, J.), rendered May 21, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of burglary in the second degree. It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of burglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25 [2]). County Court properly denied defendant’s request to charge criminal trespass in the second degree (§ 140.15 [1]) as a lesser included offense of burglary in the second degree because “[t]here is no reasonable view of the evidence that defendant entered the building without the intent to commit a crime therein” ( People v Smith , 12 AD3d 1106, 1107, lv denied 4 NY3d 767; see People v Rickett , 94 NY2d 929, 930). Furthermore, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury ( see People v Danielson , 9 NY3d 342, 349), we reject defendant’s contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley , 69 NY2d 490, 495). To the contrary, “[t]he overwhelming weight of the evidence supports the [verdict convicting defendant] of burglary in the second degree” ( People v Moore , 190 AD2d 1023, 1023, lv denied 81 NY2d 1077). We have considered defendant’s contentions in his pro se supplemental brief and conclude that they are without merit.

Entered: November 8, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
STATE v. Richard W. WILLIAMS

291P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Richard W. Williams, for Williams, Richard W.

Kristin Jo Uicker, Assistant Attorney General, Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th of August 2017 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Beasley, J. and Morgan, J. recused
Phyllis V. PARSONS, Plaintiff v. Donald Joe PARSONS, Jr., individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Donald Joe Parsons, Defendants

No. COA17-278

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: February 6, 2018

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 accompanying Annual Report of Targeted Genetics
Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, H. Stewart Parker,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

        (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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.

March 10, 2004                                    /s/ H. Stewart Parker
-------------------------                         -----------------------------
Date                                              H. Stewart Parker
                                                  President and
                                                  Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-97586, 33-97588 and 333-71453) of
our report dated February 08, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of Western Ohio Financial Corporation as of December 31, 2000 and 1999 and the
related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in
shareholders' equity and cash flows for the years then ended.


/s/ Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP
------------------------------------


Columbus, Ohio
March 27, 2001
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56443]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19240]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Mendocino Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Mendocino County Resource Advisory Committee will meet 
October 21, 2005, (RAC) in Willits, California. Agenda items to be 
covered included: (1) Approval of minutes, (2) Public Comment, (3) Sub-
committees (4) Discussion--items of interest (5) Next agenda and 
meeting date.

DATES: The meeting will be held on October 21, 2005, from 9 a.m. until 
12 noon.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Mendocino County Museum, 
located at 400 E. Commercial St. Willits, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberta Hurt, Committee Coordinator, 
USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Covelo Ranger District, 78150 Covelo 
Road, Covelo CA 95428. (707) 983-8503; e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b49534e494f7b5d48155d5e5f154e48"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ccbea4b9beb88caabfe2aaa9a8e2b9bf">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. Persons 
who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file 
written statements with the Committee staff by October 13, 2005. Public 
comment will have the opportunity to address the committee at the 
meeting.

    Dated: September 21, 2005.
Blaine Baker,
Designated Federal Official.
[FR Doc. 05-19240 Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
exhibit_4-10.htm










Exhibit 4.10


 


January 18, 2013


 



	
To:

	
Mazor Robotics Ltd. 7 


HaEshel St.







Caesarea Park, ISRAEL


 


Re: Extension and Term under Sub-Contracting Agreement


 


Reference is made to that certain Sub-Contracting Agreement dated September 28, 2005 by and between the undersigned (the "Agreement"). All capitalized terms used herein, which are not otherwise defined herein, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement.


 


Whereas the term of the Agreement has previously expired, and notwithstanding such expiration, we have continued to manufacture the Robots which are the subject matter of the Agreement; and


 


Whereas the Parties wish that we will continue to manufactured the Robots under the terms and conditions of the Agreement;


 


Both parties hereby agree to extend the terms of the Agreement for a period of 24 months from the date of this letter, subject to prior termination in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as applicable (the "Extended Agreement").


 


Notwithstanding to the abovementioned and to Section 11 of the Agreement, MPS hereby agree not to terminate the Extended Agreement in case that during any year of the extended period of 24 months the total quantity of Robots ordered by Mazor shall be less then 20, subject to MPS commitment to continue to manufacture all Robots with Mazor.


 


Both parties agree to change clauses 5.1 and 5.2 in order to reflect the fact that the Robots are a medical device and not a drug packaging device. Therefore the new clause 5.1 will be formulated as follows:


 



	
5.1

	
All Robots manufactured by MPS must (1) conform with the Specifications and (2) be manufactured, labeled, packaged, stored and tested (while in possession of, stored by, or under the control of MPS) in accordance with ISO 13485.







 


And the new clause 5.2 will be formulated as follows:


 



	
5.2

	
The Robot shall be manufactured, assembled and tested in compliance with the MPS's internal quality system, the Specifications, the Acceptance Criteria and to ISO 13485.







 




  





  











  






 


Please confirm your consent by fixing your signature below.


 


MPS Micro Precision System AG


 


By:  /s/ Nicola Thibaudeao


Name: Nicola Thibaudeao


Dated: January 18, 2013


 


By:  /s/ Gregoire Bagnoud


Name: Gregoire Bagnoud


Dated: January 21, 2013


 


Agreed and accepted:


 


Masor Robotics Ltd.


 


By:  /s/ Ori Hadomi


Name: Ori Hadomi


Title: CEO


Dated: January 18, 2013


 


By:  /s/ Eli Zehavi


Name: Eli Zehavi


Title: COO


Dated:  January 18, 2013


 


- 2 -