alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.43


Exhibit 10.43




PROMISSORY NOTE







$100,000                                                                                                                                                  December 15, 2010







FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned (herein "Maker"), promises to pay to the order of Joseph W. Abrams (“Payee”), the principal sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) one (1) year from the date hereof (the "Maturity Date"), unless Payee consents to an extension of the Maturity Date, in lawful money of the United States of America unless Payee agrees to another form of payment. The unpaid principal amount shall bear interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum, which shall be payable on the one-year anniversary of the date hereof (or until the earlier date of payment if this Note is prepaid).

9.

If the Maker shall make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or shall admit in writing its inability to pay its debts as they become due, or shall file a petition in bankruptcy, or shall be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent, then, and upon the happening of any such event, the Payee at its option, may declare the entire unpaid balance of the principal hereunder immediately due and payable with interest thereon as herein provided. 

10.

Presentment, demand, protest or notice of any kind are hereby waived by the Maker.  Maker may not set off against any amounts due to Payee hereunder any claims against Payee or other amounts owed by Payee to Maker.

11.

In the case any one or more of the events of default specified in paragraph 1 above shall have happened and be continuing, the Payee may proceed to protect and enforce its rights either by suit in equity and/or by action at law, or by other appropriate proceedings.

12.

The Maker agrees to pay all reasonable costs of collection, including attorneys’ fees which may be incurred in the collection of this Note or any portion thereof and, in case an action is instituted for such purposes, the amount of all attorneys' fees shall be such amount as the court shall adjudge reasonable.

13.

This Note is made and delivered in, and shall be governed, construed and enforced under the laws of the State of California.

14.

No delay or omission of the Payee to exercise any right hereunder, whether before or after the happening of any event of default, shall impair any such right or shall operate as a waiver thereof or of any event of default hereunder nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or further exercise thereof, or the exercise of any other right.

15.

This Note shall be subject to prepayment, at the option of the Maker, in whole or in part, at any time and from time to time, without premium or penalty.

16.

This Note or any benefits or obligations hereunder may not be assigned or transferred by the Maker.







MAKER:




PROPELL CORPORATION







By: s/Edward Bernstein                 

Edward Bernstein, CEO










Acknowledged and agreed to by PAYEE:







By: /s/Joseph Abrams                 

Joseph W. Abrams




Date:
CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 CHIEF
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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Davi Skin,
Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to my knowledge, that:
 
 (1)
    the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Davi Skin, Inc. for the quarter ended
      March 31, 2005 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
      quarter ended March 31, 2005, fairly presents in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of Davi Skin,
      Inc. 
 By:
    /s/ Parrish
      MedleyName:
    Parrish
      MedleyTitle:
    Principal Executive Officer and DirectorDate:
    May 20, 2005By:
    /s/ Margaret
      RobleyName:
    Margaret RobleyTitle:
    Principal Financial OfficerDate:
    May 20, 2005
----

| 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. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                              |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                              |
|   | By:/s/ Joseph P. Caruso                   |
|   | Name: Joseph P. Caruso                                             |
|   | Title: Chief Executive Officer and President                                      |
|   |                                                                              |
|   | Date: March 9, 2011                                                               |
|   |                                                                              |
|   |                                                                              |
|   | By:/s/ Paul S. Weiner           |
|   | Name: Paul S. Weiner                                                              |
|   | Title: Chief Financial Officer                                                    |
|   |                                                                              |
|   | Date: March 9, 2011                                                               |

----
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC, 

INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

T-MOBILE USA, INC., T-MOBILE US, INC., UNITED 

STATES CELLULAR CORPORATION, 

SPRINTCOM, INC., SPRINT SPECTRUM LP, 

NEXTEL OF CALIFORNIA, INC., VIRGIN MOBILE 

USA, L.P.,

Defendants-Appellees

______________________

2017-2601, 2017-2604, 2017-2608, 2017-2610, 2018-1027, 

2018-1029, 2018-1033

______________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the 

District of Delaware in Nos. 1:13-cv-01632-LPS, 1:13-cv01633-LPS, 1:13-cv-01634-LPS, 1:13-cv-01635-LPS, 1:13-

cv-01636-LPS, 1:13-cv-01637-LPS, 1:15-cv-00800-LPS, 

Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

MARTIN JAY BLACK, Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, PA, 

argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Also represented by 
ROBERT W. ASHBROOK, JR.; JOSEPH M. ABRAHAM, Austin, 

TX; JUSTIN BOYCE, NISHA PATEL, Mountain View, CA; 

ROBERT RHOAD, Princeton, NJ. 

 BRIAN BUROKER, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, 

Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees TMobile USA, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc. Also represented by 

JOSH KREVITT, New York, NY; ERIC TSAI SYU, Irvine, CA; 

ALISON R. WATKINS, Palo Alto, CA. 

 DAVID EVAN FINKELSON, McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, VA, argued for defendants-appellees SprintCom, 

Inc., Sprint Spectrum LP, Nextel of California, Inc., 

Virgin Mobile USA, L.P, United States Cellular Corporation. Also represented by KRISTEN MARIE CALLEJA,

MATTHEW ALLEN FITZGERALD. 

 

 STEVEN J. HOROWITZ, Sidley Austin LLP, Chicago, IL, 

for defendant-appellee United States Cellular Corporation. Also represented by DOUGLAS LEWIS. 

 ______________________

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (LOURIE, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 

 January 14, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
#### GUY D. GRIMES v. CHAS. W. FULTON, and GUY D. GRIMES v. CHAS. W. FULTON and J. M. FULTON.

(Filed 17 April, 1929.)

Appeal and Error J lb — Power of removal for convenience of witness is within discretion of court and not reviewable. ,

A motion for the removal of a cause from one county to another for convenience of witnesses and to promote the ends of justice is addressed to the sound discretion of the Superior Court judge, and is not subject to review in the Supreme Court except upon abuse of this discretion, C. S., 470. As to whether a city court has the right to remove a cause for this reason to a Superior Court of a different county is not presented by the record on this appeal.

Appeal by defendant, Charles *W.*Fulton, from *Shaw, J.,*at December Term, 1928, of Gtjilfobd.

Motion by the defendant, Charges *W.*Fulton, to remove these actions for slander and slander of title from “the municipal court of .the city of High Point,” where they were instituted, to the Superior Court of Surry County for trial on the grounds of convenience of witnesses and to promote the ends of justice, which motion was denied in the court of first instance and judgment affirmed on appeal to the Superior Court of Guilford County.

From the order of the Superior Court affirming the judgment of the municipal court the said defendant appeals, assigning errors.

*85*King, Sapp ■& King, Gold & York and Roberson, Haworth & Reese fm* plaintiff.*

*Folger & Folger and Carter & Carter for defendant, C. W. Fulton.*

Stacy, C. J.

It is not conceded that the judge of “tbe municipal court of the city of High Point” bas the power to remove a cause from said municipal court to the Superior Court of a county other than Guilford for trial, but even if it were (wbicb question is not presented and therefore not decided), still the motion to remove, on the grounds stated, “for' the convenience of witnesses and to promote the ends of justice,” C. S., 470, rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, and is not reviewable on appeal in the absence of abuse of such discretion. *Power Co. v. Klutz,*196 N. C., 358, and cases cited.

Affirmed.
#### M. E. TEETER v. W. A. NEWELL and J. B. LINKER.

(Filed 28 June, 1933.)

Civil action, before *Finley, J.,*at August Term, 1932, of Cabarrus.

Plaintiff instituted this action against the defendant Newell to recover upon certain notes executed by *J.*B. Linker. He alleged that Newell was a partner with Linker in the purchase of certain land, and that the notes were given in payment of the purchase price. The defendant Newell denied that he was a partner and offered testimony to the effect that he had loaned Linker money to buy land, but that he was not interested in any of the purchases. The issue of indebtedness was answered by the jury in favor of defendant, and from judgment upon the verdict the plaintiff appealed.

*W. S. Bogle for plaintiff.*

*S. S. Williams for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

The evidence discloses a controverted issue of fact, and the verdict is determinative of the controversy. No exception presented in the record warrants the overthrow of the judgment.

No error.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 21, 2009

d1214 

# Order

December 21, 2009

139747

MARY T. SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 139747 COA: 286833 Oakland CC: 07-086204-NM FRANK HARON WEINER & NAVARRO, DAVID L. HARON, MONICA P. NAVARRO, and J. LAEVN WEINER, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 18, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2673

Reelcraft Industries:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


   
        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-94026, 33-51234, 33- 75028, 33-77684, 33-57628,
33-80581 and 33-80583) pertaining to the Apria Healthcare Group Inc./Homedco
Group, Inc.'s Stock Incentive Plan, Apria Healthcare Group Inc. Amended and
Restated 1992 Stock Option Plan, 1992 Stock Incentive Plan, 1994 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, 1991 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and 1991 Management Stock
Purchase Plan of our report dated March 11, 1998, except for Notes 5, 12 and 14,
as to which the dates are April 13, 1998, April 9, 1998 and April 3, 1998,
respectively, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
of Apria Healthcare Group Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1997.
    


                                                     ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Orange County, California
   
September 4, 1998
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 2621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-468]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service
[Dept. Circ. 570, 1994 Rev., Supp. No. 7]


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds; Ranger Insurance 
Co.

    A Certificate of Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal Bonds 
is hereby issued to the following company under sections 9304 to 9308, 
Title 31, of the United States Code. Federal bond-approving officers 
should annotate their reference copies of the Treasury Circular 570, 
1994 Revision, on page 34173 to reflect this addition:

    Ranger Insurance Company. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2807, 
Houston, TX 77252. PHONE: (713) 954-8100. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION/ 
b/: $6,839,000. SURETY LICENSES/ c/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, 
DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, 
MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, 
TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Delaware.

    Certificates of Authority expire on June 30 each year, unless 
revoked prior to that date. The Certificates are subject to subsequent 
annual renewal as long as the companies remain qualified (31 CFR part 
223). A list of qualified companies is published annually as of July 1 
in Treasury Department Circular 570, with details as to underwriting 
limitations, areas in which licensed to transact surety business and 
other information.
    Copies of the Circular may be obtained from the Surety Bond Branch, 
Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service, Department of 
the Treasury, Washington, DC 20227, telephone (202) 874-7102.

    Dated: December 28, 1994.
Charles F. Schwan III,
Director, Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service.
[FR Doc. 95-468 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
EXHIBIT 32.2**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**In connection with the quarterly report of Payless ShoeSource, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/Afor the period ending July 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Ullrich E. Porzig, Senior Vice President — Chief Financial Officerand Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Date: February 21, 2006       /s/ Ullrich E. Porzig     Ullrich E. Porzig    Senior Vice President — Chief Financial Officer    and Treasurer    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 15, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5977]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 61

[FRL-5169-8]


Approval of Delegation of Authority; National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Radionuclides; Utah

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to grant delegation of authority to the State of 
Utah to implement and enforce five National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for radionuclides. The Governor of 
Utah requested delegation from EPA Region VIII in a letter dated June 
4, 1993. In the final rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is 
approving the State of Utah's request for delegation as a direct final 
rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a 
noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. EPA's 
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no 
adverse comments are received in response to this proposed rule, no 
further activity is contemplated in relation to this rule. If EPA 
receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and 
all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second 
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on 
this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received in writing by 
April 14, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to Patricia D. Hull, 
Director, Air, Radiation & Toxics Division, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 
80202-2466 and concurrently to Russell A. Roberts, Director, Division 
of Air Quality, Department of Environmental Quality, 1950 West North 
Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4820. Copies of State of Utah's 
submittal are available for public inspection during normal business 
hours at the above locations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. Scott Whitmore at (303) 293-1758.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the final 
action which is located in the final rules section of this Federal 
Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Radiation protection.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412.

    Dated: February 23, 1995.
Kerrigan Clough,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.
[FR Doc. 95-5977 Filed 3-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 42 (Friday, March 3, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5252]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 94-118; RM-8521]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Norris, Tennessee

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Norris Broadcasting Company, 
allots Channel 294A to Norris, Tennessee. See 59 FR 51398, October 11, 
1994. Channel 294A can be allotted to Norris, Tennessee, in compliance 
with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a 
site restriction of 4.1 kilometers (2.5 miles) northeast in order to 
avoid a short-spacing conflict with Station WSKZ(FM), Channel 293C, 
Chattanooga, Tennessee. The coordinates for Channel 294A at Norris are 
36-13-47 and 84-02-59. With this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective April 10, 1995. The window period for filing 
applications will open on April 10, 1995, and close on May 11, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 94-118, adopted February 15, 1995, and 
released February 24, 1995. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, 
D.C. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, 
NW, Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Tennessee, 
is amended by adding Norris, Channel 294A.

John A Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 95-5252 Filed 3-2-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0240 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JASON RALPH EBY,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 23, 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Beth Baker Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 16 2023

05/16/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0240