alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BERNICE T. HAGINS v. AERO MAYFLOWER TRANSIT CO., INC.; CHAMPION STORAGE AND TRUCKING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, and REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF GREENSBORO

No. 684

(Filed 31 January 1969)

Appeal by plaintiff from the decision of the Court of Appeals (reported in 1 N.C. App. 51, 159 S.E. 2d 592) affirming the judgment of *Crissman, J.,*entered at the 2 October 1967 Civil Session of Guilford, Greensboro Division.

*Comer & Harrelson for plaintiff appellant.*

*McLendon, Brim, Brooks, Pierce & Daniels by Edgar B. Fisher, Jr., for Aero Mayflower Transit Company, Inc., and Champion Storage and Trucking Company, Inc., defendant appellees.*

*Cannon, Wolfe, Coggin & Taylor for Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro, defendant appellee.*

PER Curiam.

This is a companion case to *Hagins v. Redevelopment Commission,*decided this day and reported *ante*90. It is referred to in *107sufficient detail in the statement of facts in that case to disclose that decision there controls decision here. See also the statement of facts preceding the final four paragraphs in the opinion of the Court of Appeals. 1 N.C. App. 51, 55, 159 S.E. 2d 592, 595.

For the reasons stated in *Hagins v. Redevelopment Commission,*the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and this cause is remanded to that Court with the direction that it vacate the judgment of the Superior Court from which plaintiff appealed and remand the case to that court for such further proceedings, consistent with the legal principles herein enunciated, as may be initiated.

Error and remanded.
Exhibit 10.2


 


Amendment
NO. 1 to Standby Equity Purchase Agreement


 


THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1
(the “Amendment”), dated as of February 28, 2022, to the Standby Equity Purchase Agreement (the “SEPA”),
dated as of February 15, 2022, by and between YA II PN, Ltd., a Cayman Islands exempt limited partnership (the “Investor”),
and Romeo Power Inc., a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Company”, and together with
the Investor, the “Parties”), is being executed at the direction of the Parties.


 


WHEREAS,
Section 13.02 of the SEPA permits the Parties to amend the SEPA through an instrument in writing signed by the Parties.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration
of the foregoing and the agreements, provisions and covenants herein contained, the Parties agree as follows:


 


1.            The
defined term “Commitment Amount” in Section 1.13 of the SEPA is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:


 


“Commitment
Amount” shall mean $350,000,000 of Common Shares, provided that, the Company shall not affect any sales under this Agreement
and the Investor shall not have the obligation to purchase Common Shares under this Agreement to the extent (but only to the extent) that
after giving effect to such purchase and sale the aggregate number of Common Shares issued under this Agreement would exceed 19.99% of
the outstanding Common Shares as of the date of this Agreement (the “Exchange Cap”); provided further that, (a)
the Exchange Cap will not apply if the Company’s stockholders have approved issuances in excess of the Exchange Cap in accordance
with the rules of the Principal Market, and (b) as to any Advance, the issuance of Shares in respect of such Advance would be excluded
from the Exchange Cap if the Purchase Price paid for such Shares equals or exceeds the Minimum Price (as defined in Section 312.03 of
the NYSE Listed Company Manual) applicable to such Advance.


 


[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]


 






    1


     


    

 


The Parties hereto have caused
this Amendment to be executed and delivered as of the day and year first written above.


 


	 	COMPANY:
	 	Romeo Power, Inc.  
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Matthew Sant
	 	Name: 	Matthew Sant
	 	Title:	General Counsel and Secretary







	 	 
	 	INVESTOR:
	 	YA II PN, Ltd.  
	 	 
	 	By:	Yorkville Advisors Global, LP
	 	Its:	Investment Manager




 


	 	By:	Yorkville Advisors Global II, LLC  
	 	Its:	General Partner  




 


	 	By:	/s/ M. Beckman
	 	Name: 	Matt Beckman
	 	Title:	Member


 


[SIGNATURE
PAGE TO AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO SEPA]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                              40
<SECURITIES>                                       132
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1645
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (31)
<INVENTORY>                                        473
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                            1617
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (869)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3605
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                           1322
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           786
<OTHER-SE>                                      (2292)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3605
<SALES>                                           1493
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1543
<CGS>                                             1292
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1523
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    57
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     4
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  41
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     20
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (4)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 16
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        16
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>The company has adopted an unclassified presentation in the Statement of
Financial Condition.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# L_2007046EN.01000901.xml

| 16.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 46/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 46/9

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 146/2007

of 15 February 2007

amending Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 as regards conditions for certain trawls for vessels operating pump aboard systems

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (1), and in particular Article 48 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 (2) sets out detailed rules concerning the attachment of devices to trawls, Danish seines and similar nets. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 (2) sets out detailed rules concerning the attachment of devices to trawls, Danish seines and similar nets.

| (2) | In order to ensure the safety of the crews, supplementary measures on technical conditions as regards vessels operating pump aboard systems, which do not affect selectivity, should be implemented in 2007. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In order to ensure the safety of the crews, supplementary measures on technical conditions as regards vessels operating pump aboard systems, which do not affect selectivity, should be implemented in 2007.

| (3) | Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 the following paragraph 4 is added:

‘4.   By way of derogation of the provisions laid down in paragraph 2, it shall be permitted for vessels operating pump aboard systems to attach a codline at a distance which is no more than 10 m from the rear meshes of the codend, when fishing with trawls with a mesh size of less than 70 mm.’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 February 2007.

For the Commission

Joe BORG

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 125, 27.4.1998, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2166/2005 (OJ L 345, 28.12.2005, p. 5).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 318, 7.12.1984, p. 23. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2122/89 (OJ L 203, 15.7.1989, p. 21).

2

---
**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

The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of SoftNet Technology Corporation (the "Company"), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:			A. the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and			B. the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.			Dated: August 15, 2005

/s/ James Farinella                              			James Farinella			Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                          12,203
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,181
<ALLOWANCES>                                       149
<INVENTORY>                                      8,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,113
<PP&E>                                          19,916
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,767
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,964
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,417
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           658
<OTHER-SE>                                      42,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,964
<SALES>                                         43,271
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,271
<CGS>                                           33,582
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   50,512
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 148
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,528)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,220)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,308)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,308)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.99)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.99)
        

</TABLE>
V 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5373 

For the relief of Allan Bolar Kelley. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2010 

Mr. WAXMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Allan Bolar Kelley. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ALLAN 

4 BOLAR KELLEY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Allan Bolar Kelley shall be eligible for issuance of 

8 an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of 

9 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 

10 filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa 

11 under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status 

12 to lawful permanent resident. 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5373 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Allan Bolar Kelley 

2 enters the United States before the filing deadline speci3 fied in subsection (c), he shall be considered to have en4 tered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, 

5 be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of 

6 the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 

7 enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Allan Bolar Kelley, the Secretary of State shall 

16 instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the cur17 rent or next following fiscal year, the total number of im18 migrant visas that are made available to natives of the 

19 country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the 

20 Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the 

21 total number of immigrant visas that are made available 

22 to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under section 

23 202(e) of such Act. 

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5373 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Allan Bolar Kelley shall 

2 not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 

3 privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality 

4 Act. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE v. STEVE REVIS.

(Filed 4 May, 1966.)

Escape § 1—

Where the indictment for escape nowhere refers to a previous conviction of defendant for escape, it will not support a sentence for the felony.

Mooke, J., not sitting.

Appeal by defendant from- *Stevens, J.,*January 1966 Session, MONTGOMERY Superior Court.

Defendant was tried under a bill of indictment charging that:

“* * * (O)n the 18th day of October, 1965, with force and arms, and in the County aforesaid (Montgomery), while he * * * was then and there lawfully confined in the North Carolina State Prison System in the lawfully *(sic)*custody of the Superintendent of State Prison Unit #042, Troy, North Carolina, and while then and there serving a sentence for the crime of * * * Larcency *(sic)** * * Escape which is a Misdemeanor under the laws of the State of North Carolina, imposed at the August 4, 1965 Term General County Court, and September 23, 1965 term Recorders Court, Henderson and Montgomery Counties, then and there unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously did attempt to escape and escaped from the said State Prison Unit #042, Troy, North Carolina against the form of the Statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State.”

The defendant entered a plea of guilty to it and it was treated by the court as a felony for a second offense of escape. He was sentenced to serve twelve months-upon the felonious charge which was to begin “at the expiration of the sentence for escape, which he is now serving for escape * *

From the judgment pronounced, the defendant appealed.

*256
      *S. H. McCall, Jr., Attorney for the appellant.*

*T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, Theodore C. Brown, Jr., Staff Attorney, for the State.*

Per Curiam.

An examination of the bill of indictment discloses that it does not properly charge a felonious escape because it nowhere refers to “previous conviction of escape from the State Prison System” which is one of the elements necessary under G.S. 148-45. However, it will support a charge of an escape, a misdemeanor. The Attorney General is well advised in conceding as much. The cause will be remanded to the Superior Court of Montgomery County for proper judgment upon a plea of guilty of escape, a misdemeanor. The defendant is entitled to credit for any time he may have served upon the invalid judgment.

Error and remanded.

Moore, J., not sitting.
# L_2007071EN.01000501.xml

| 10.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 71/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 71/5

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 258/2007

of 9 March 2007

on the issue of import licences for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/97 of 27 May 1997 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for high-quality fresh, chilled and frozen beef and for frozen buffalo meat (2),

Whereas:

| (1) | Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f).

| (2) | Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 at 11 500 t. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 at 11 500 t.

| (3) | It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   All applications for import licences from 1 to 5 March 2007 for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal as referred to in Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 shall be granted in full.

2.   Applications for licences may be submitted, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 936/97, during the first five days of April 2007 for 8 130,328 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 March 2007.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 9 March 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 137, 28.5.1997, p. 10. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1745/2006 (OJ L 329, 25.11.2006, p. 22).

2

---
#### ADAM PATRICK WEBSTER, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

No. 24222

November 24, 1993

864 P.2d 294

*Michael R. Specchio,*Public Defender and *Janet Cobb Schmuck,*Deputy Public Defender, Washoe County, for Appellant.

*Frankie Sue Del Papa,*Attorney General, Carson City; *Dorothy Nash Holmes,*District Attorney, Washoe County, for Respondent.

*1085OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

On May 2, 1991, appellant was convicted, pursuant to a guilty plea, of one count of possession of a controlled substance. The district court sentenced appellant to serve a term of five years in the Nevada State Prison. Appellant’s sentence was suspended and he was placed on probation, subject to certain conditions, for an indeterminate period not to exceed four years. Subsequently, on January 9, 1992, the district court modified appellant’s probation to include another condition, specifically, that he submit to the Department of Parole and Probation’s residential confinement program for an indeterminate period not to exceed 120 days. Appellant served in the program from January 28, 1992, to May 26, 1992.

On October 27, 1992, the district court issued an order revoking appellant’s probation. Appellant was given credit for 125 days time served. On January 20, 1993, appellant filed a proper person motion to amend his judgment of conviction to include residential confinement credits. On February 17, 1993, the district court issued an order denying the motion.

Appellant contends that the district court erred in denying his motion for credit for time served in residential confinement. We disagree. Appellant is not entitled to credit for time spent on probation outside of incarceration. Van Dorn v. Warden, 93 Nev. 524, 569 P.2d 938 (1977). The imposition of residential confinement as a condition of appellant’s probation is insufficient to change the character of his probation from a conditional liberty to actual confinement. *Cf.*Grant v. State, 99 Nev. 149, 659 P.2d 878 (1983). We conclude, therefore, that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for credit for time served in residential confinement, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.