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





Exhibit 4.12



DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED


The following summary describes the common shares, no par value, of Bausch Health Companies Inc. (the “Company”), which are the only securities of the Company registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
The following summary describes the material terms of our common stock and is not complete. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to applicable British Columbia law and our Articles. For a complete description of our common stock, we refer you to our Articles, which have been filed with the SEC and are incorporated by reference as an exhibit to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Common Shares
Voting Rights
The holders of the common shares are entitled to receive notice of and attend (in person or by proxy) and be heard at all general meetings of the shareholders of the Company (other than separate meetings of the holders of shares of any other class of shares or any series of shares of such other class of shares, if any). The holders of the common shares are entitled to vote at all such general meetings, with each holder of the common shares being entitled to one vote per common share held at all such meetings. 
Dividend Rights
Subject to any preference as to the payment of dividends provided to any shares ranking in priority to common shares (if any then outstanding), the holders of common shares shall be entitled to participate equally with each other as to dividends, as and when declared by the Company’s board of directors, out of moneys properly applicable to the payment of dividends, in amounts per share and at the same time on all such common shares at the time outstanding as the Company’s board of directors may from time to time determine. 
Liquidation, Dissolution and Winding-Up Rights
In the event of the liquidation, dissolution or winding-up or other distribution of assets among the Company’s shareholders for the purpose of winding up the Company’s affairs, all of the property and assets of the Company which remain after payment to the holders of any shares ranking in priority to the common shares in respect of payment upon liquidation, dissolution or winding-up (if any then outstanding) of all amounts attributed and properly payable to such holders of any such other shares in the event of such liquidation, dissolution, winding-up or distribution, shall be paid or distributed equally, share for share, to the holders of the common shares without preference or distinction.
Other Rights
The holders of common shares do not have any preemptive, subscription or redemption rights.
Listing
The Company’s common shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol “BHC.”
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-1499

_____________________________

ANDRELO L. WITCHER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

James M. Colaw, Judge.

June 17, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, BILBREY, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Paula C. Coffman, Orlando, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kristie Regan, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

ERICK BURGESS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 09-13019

PROBABILITY PHYSICAL THERAPY, LLC,

Defendant.

/

ORDER SETTING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

On May 23, 2011, the court conducted a telephone conference to discuss the

parties’ settlement efforts and whether the court should reopen the case. The court is

persuaded that the parties are continuing to make progress toward settlement, and will

therefore decline to issue a scheduling order, at this point. The court will conduct a

telephone conference in two weeks to discuss the status of the document preparation. 

If, at that time, the parties have reached an impasse, the court will reopen the case for

appropriate proceedings. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that counsel for Plaintiff Relator, Defendant, and the

Government shall participate in a telephone conference on June 13, 2011, at 4:00 p.m.

In the meantime, the case will remain closed, although the dismissal is without prejudice

until further order of the court. In the event the parties submit a stipulated order of

dismissal or judgment by June 10, 2011, the telephone conference will be canceled. 

2:09-cv-13019-RHC-MAR Doc # 19 Filed 05/25/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 88
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C3 ORDERS\09-13019.BURGESS.TelephoneConference.chd.wpd

2

Nothing in this order shall be deemed to adversely affect or in any way

impact the parties’ rights. 

 S/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 25, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record

on this date, May 25, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522

2:09-cv-13019-RHC-MAR Doc # 19 Filed 05/25/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 89
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4083 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 444

104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4083

                          [Report No. 104-814]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To extend certain programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
                      through September 30, 1997.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 20, 1996

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

                                                 Union Calendar No. 444
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4083

                          [Report No. 104-814]

To extend certain programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
                      through September 30, 1997.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 1996

 Mr. Schaefer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Commerce

                           September 20, 1996

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend certain programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
                      through September 30, 1997.

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

SECTION 1. ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT AMENDMENTS.

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act is amended--
            (1) by amending section 166 (42 U.S.C. 6246) to read as 
        follows:

                   ``authorization of appropriations

    ``Sec. 166. There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
1997 such sums as may be necessary to implement this part.'';
            (2) in section 181 (42 U.S.C. 6251) by striking ``June 30, 
        1996'' both places it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
        ``September 30, 1997'';
            (3) by adding at the end of section 256(h) (42 U.S.C. 
        6276(h)) ``There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
        year 1997 such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 
        part.''; and
            (4) in section 281 (42 U.S.C. 6285) by striking ``June 30, 
        1996'' both places it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
        ``September 30, 1997''.
```
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

BENGE CORP., A FLORIDA 

CORPORATION, 

Appellant, 

v. Case No. 5D21-2600

LT Case No. 2021-CA-000875-O

EASTWOOD COMMUNITY

ASSOCIATION, INC., A

FLORIDA NOT FOR PROFIT

CORPORATION, 

Appellee. 

________________________________/ 

Decision filed October 18, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Orange County, 

Denise Beamer , Judge.

Rebecca E. Rhoden and Hal Kantor, of

Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor &

Reed, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant.

Mark D. Tinker and Mary Lou CuellarStilo, of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.,

Tampa and Scott A. Cole, of Cole, Scott,

& Kissane, P.A., Miami, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

SASSO, NARDELLA and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.
[logo]                                                [LOGO]


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
of Carnegie Bancorp (the "Company") on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-81918, 333-20515
and 333-29631) of our report dated February 2, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Carnegie Bancorp and Subsidiary as of
December 31, 1997 and 1996, and for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and
1995 which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also
consent to the reference to our Firm under the caption "Experts".


                                                 Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

Princeton, New Jersey
March 30, 1998
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4092

To prevent law enforcement agencies from stopping people on highways

because of their race or color.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 17, 1996

Mr. FOGLIETTA (for himself, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. FATTAH,

Mrs. MEEK of Florida, Mr. DELLUMS, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. OWENS, Mr.

TOWNS, Mr. HILLIARD, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. FROST, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr.

BARRETT of Wisconsin, Mr. EVANS, Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA, Mr. JOHNSTON

of Florida, Mr. TORRES, Ms. WATERS, Ms. NORTON, Ms. MCKINNEY,

Mr. FORD, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. WATT of North

Carolina, Ms. BROWN of Florida, and Mr. JACKSON of Illinois) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To prevent law enforcement agencies from stopping people

on highways because of their race or color.

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 ‘‘Freedom of the High5 ways Act of 1996’’.
2

•HR 4092 IH

1 SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT STOPS BASED

2 ON RACE OR COLOR.

3 (a) UNLAWFUL CONDUCT.—It shall be unlawful for

4 any law enforcement agency or officer, acting under color

5 of authority, to stop any person driving or riding in an

6 automobile because of the race or color of that person.

7 (b) CIVIL ACTION.—Any person or class of persons

8 aggrieved by a violation of subsection (a) may, in a civil

9 action, obtain appropriate relief. In such a civil action, a

10 showing that a pattern exists in a particular region of dis11 parate stopping of persons on highways based on race or

12 color is sufficient to constitute prima facie evidence of a

13 violation of such subsection in that region.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 746 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 746

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore and make 
 permanent the exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 1995

 Mr. Pickett introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore and make 
 permanent the exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Employee Educational Assistance Act 
of 1995''.

SEC. 2. EMPLOYER-PROVIDED EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

    (a) In General.--Section 127 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to educational assistance programs) is amended by striking 
subsection (d) and by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (d).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1994.
                                 <all>
```
#### Ebersbach, Recr., *v.*Blackmore, Aud., et al. (Two cases.)

(Nos. 23539 and 23540

Decided May 25, 1932.)

*638
      *Mr. Chalmers M. Parker, Mr. Fred C. Rector*and *Mr. Fred W. Crow,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Cedric W. Clark,*prosecuting attorney, *Mr. A. D. Russell*and *Mr. D. H. Peoples,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petitions in error be, and the same are hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said causes.

*Petitions in error dismissed.*

Jones, Day, Allen and Kinkade, JJ., concur.

Marshall, C. J., not participating.
#### John Loftus et al. v. Helen Hamilton, by Her Next Friend. Same v. Ruby Hamilton, by Her Next Friend.

Royal Wright and S. Philbrick, attorneys for appellants.

John J. Rea and T. J. Smith, attorneys for appellee.

Opinion per Curiam.

These two cases are in all essential features like John Loftus and Amos Morfey v. Stella Hamilton, by her next friend, *ante.*They were tried with that cause by the same jury. Twenty dollars damages were allowed in each case. We affirm these cases for the reasons appearing in the opinion filed in the Stella Hamilton case.

Mr. Presiding Justice Wright took no part.
Exhibit 21

                              ATOMIC BURRITO, INC.

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                               DECEMBER 31, 2000


        1.      Western Country Club 1, Ltd.                      80% Owned

        2.      Entertainment Wichita, Inc.                      100% Owned

        3.      In Cahoots, Ltd.                                  80% Owned

        4.      Western Newco, Inc.                              100% Owned

        5.      AB of Houston-I, L.L.C.                           50% Owned

        6.      AB of OKC-I, L.L.C.                              100% Owned

        7.      AB of Norman, L.L.C.                             100% Owned
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 715 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 715

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 15, 1995

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Central Bering Sea Fisheries Enforcement Act of 1992 to 
prohibit fishing in the Central Sea of Okhotsk by vessels and nationals 
                         of the United States.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Sea of Okhotsk Fisheries Enforcement 
Act of 1995''.

SEC. 2. FISHING PROHIBITION.

    The Central Bering Sea Fisheries Enforcement Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 
1823 note) is amended--
            (1) in section 302, by inserting ``and the Central Sea of 
        Okhotsk'' after ``Central Bering Sea''; and
            (2) in section 306--
                    (A) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), 
                and (6) in order as paragraphs (3), (4), (5), (6), and 
                (7); and
                    (B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
            ``(2) Central sea of okhotsk.--The term `Central Sea of 
        Okhotsk' means the central Sea of Okhotsk area which is more 
        than two hundred nautical miles seaward of the baseline from 
        which the breadth of the territorial sea of the Russian 
        Federation is measured.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 14, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration

This is a decision pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L.106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 2104, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, D.C.

Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. We know of no instruments of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument described below, for such purposes as the instrument is intended to be used, that was being manufactured in the United States at the time of its order.

Docket Number: 08-018. Applicant: Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130. Instrument: Modular Hot Cell - COMECER Model MIP1-1P-1350. Manufacturer: COMECER, Italy. Intended Use: See notice at 73 FR 30377, May 27, 2008. Reasons: The instrument has a sealed system for isotope work which is separated from the shielded door, which allows for the opening of the door for training purposes without compromising the work area air quality. The separate shield and door design also insures that the door is not contaminated, and thus, the user can open the door to survey the hot cell for radioactivity without the risk of contamination to the user and trainees. This safety feature is specific to this instrument and not available from other U.S. manufacturers.

Dated: August 12, 2008.

Faye Robinson,

Director.

Statutory Import Programs Staff Import Administration.

[FR Doc. E8-19098 Filed 8-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1
                          Subsidiaries of the Company

Natural MicroSystems Asia Ltd.
1815-16 Concordia Plaza
1 Science Museum Road
Tsim Sha- Tsui East
Kowloon, Hong Kong

Natural MicroSystems Japan K.K.
Shinjuku Greentower Building 27F
6-14-1 Nishi-Shinjuku
Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-0023
Japan

Natural MicroSystems Singapore Pte Ltd.
7 Temasek Boulevard
#44-01, Suntec Tower One
Suntec City 038983
Singapore

Natural MicroSystems Europe S.A.
Immeuble Copernic
Parc Technologique
18/22, Avenue Edouard-Herriot
92356 Le Plessis Robinson
Cedex, France

NMS Telecom Europe S.A.
Immeuble Copernic
Parc Technologique
18/22, Avenue Edouard-Herriot
92356 Le Plessis Robinson
Cedex, France

Natural MicroSystems Europe GmbH
Kapellenstrasse 45 A
D-65830 Kriftel bei Frankfurt
Germany

Natural MicroSystems Limited
Kingsmead
Epping Road
Roydon
Essex CM19 5HU
United Kingdom

Natural MicroSystems Italia
C.so Re Umberto, 79
10128 Torino
Italy

NMS BRO (China)
NMS International Beijing Rep.
1209 Beijing Silver Tower
#2 North Road, Dong San Huan
Chao Yong District
China

NMS Iberica
P Castellena, 141
Edificio Cuzco IV
28046 Madrid, Spain

Natural MicroSystems Australia Pty Ltd.
Tower Three
580 George Street
Sidney, New South Whales 1171
Australia

Natural MicroSystems International, Inc.
100 Crossing Boulevard
Framingham, MA  01702

Natural MicroSystems Europe, Inc.
100 Crossing Boulevard
Framingham, MA  01702

Natural MicroSystems FSC Ltd.
69 A Kronprindsens Gade
P.O. Box 301858-UDS
Cherlotte Amilie
St. Thomas
US Virgin Islands  00803

Natural MicroSystems Securities Corporation
100 Crossing Boulevard
Framingham, MA  01702

Natural MicroSystems
Intelligent Network Division
911 North Plum Grove Road
Schaumburg, IL  60173

Natural MicroSystems Korea, Inc.
100 Crossing Boulevard
Framingham, MA  01702

QWES.com, Inc.
14742 Newport Avenue, Suite 203
Tustin, CA 92780
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 843

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore the exception to

the market discount rules for tax-exempt obligations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 7, 1995

Mr. CARDIN (for himself and Mr. SHAW) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore

the exception to the market discount rules for tax-exempt

obligations.

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

3 SECTION 1. RESTORATION OF EXCEPTION FROM MARKET

4 DISCOUNT RULES FOR TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGA5 TIONS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 1278(a)

7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining market

8 discount bond) is amended—

9 (1) by adding at the end of subparagraph (B)

10 the following new clause:
2

•HR 843 IH

1 ‘‘(iv) TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS.—

2 Any tax-exempt obligation (as defined in

3 section 1275(a)(3)).’’, and

4 (2) by striking subparagraph (C) and redesig5 nating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

7 (1) Sections 1276(a)(4) and 1278(b)(1) of such

8 Code are each amended by striking ‘‘103,’’.

9 (2) Subparagraph (B) of section 1278(a)(4) of

10 such Code is amended by striking ‘‘or, in the case

11 of a tax-exempt obligation’’ and all that follows and

12 inserting a period.

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

14 this section shall apply to obligations purchased (within

15 the meaning of section 1272(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue

16 Code of 1986) after April 30, 1993.

Æ
195 La. 208

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Leon C. WEISS et al.

No. 35630.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 1, 1940.

Rehearing Denied April 29, 1940.

Hugh M. Wilkinson and John D. Lambert, both of New Orleans, for relator.

'Lessley P. Gardiner, Atty. Gen., James O’Connor, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Truett L. Scarborough, Dist. Atty., of Ruston, .for the State.

O’NIELL, Chief Justice.

This is one of the cases referred to in the opinion rendered today in the case of State v. Hart et al., 196 So. 62. The facts and issues in this case are stated in the opinion rendered in that case. For the reasons given in the opinion rendered in that case, the relief prayed for by the relator in this case is denied, and the judgment of the district court, overruling the relator’s plea to the jurisdiction of the court, is affirmed.

HIGGINS, J.,'concurs in the decree.