alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.15

      Amendment dated as of March 25, 2003 (this "Amendment") to the Employment
Agreement made and entered into as of May 3, 1999, between Mikron Infrared, Inc.
f/k/a Mikron Instrument Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (the "Company"),
and Dennis L. Stoneman (the "Executive").

      WHEREAS, the Executive is employed pursuant to the Agreement and serves as
the Company's Executive Vice President; and

      WHEREAS, the Employment Period(2) is scheduled to expire on May 16, 2003
and the Company and the Executive desire to extend the Executive's employment
for an additional period of two years pursuant to the terms, and subject to the
conditions of, the Agreement;

      NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual terms and
provisions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows:

      1. Amendment of Paragraph 1. The provisions of Paragraph 1 of the
Agreement are hereby deemed to have been amended to read, as follows:

            "1. Employment

                  (a) The Company hereby employs the Executive as an executive
      of the Company (as his duties are more particularly described in paragraph
      1(b) hereof) for the period commencing on May 17, 1999 and terminating on
      May 16, 2005, unless Executive's employment is terminated earlier pursuant
      to Article 4 of this Agreement (the "Employment Period").

                  (b) During the Employment Period, (i) the Executive shall
      serve as Executive Vice President, reporting directly to the President,
      and when directed to do so, to the Board of Directors of the Company (the
      "Board"); (ii) the Executive shall devote substantially all of his time
      and efforts to the Company's business for a period of not less than two
      five day business weeks during each calendar month; (iii) the Board shall
      nominate the Executive for election to the Board; and (iv) the Executive
      shall stand for election as a Director of the Company at the annual
      meetings of shareholders held throughout the term of his service under
      this Agreement."

          [the balance of this page has been left blank intentionally]

----------
(2)   Unless otherwise provided, all capitalized terms shall have the meanings
      attributed thereto in the Agreement.


                                       1
<PAGE>

      2. Continuation of Effectiveness of the Agreement. The Agreement, as
amended by this Amendment, shall continue in full force and effect.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the
date first above written.

                                        Mikron Infrared, Inc.


                                        By: ____________________________________
                                            Paul A. Kohmescher, Vice President
                                            and CFO


                                        ________________________________________
                                                   Dennis L. Stoneman


                                       2
#### MORRIS J. BLOCK v. FREDRIC M. BLOCK.

March 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          18,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,965,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,495,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,832,000
<PP&E>                                      44,840,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,075,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              57,369,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,033,000
<BONDS>                                     10,169,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        90,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,335,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                57,369,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            59,230,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               54,173,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,756,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,392,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             897,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,560,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   102,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,458,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,458,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .25


</TABLE>
#### Elijah Miller v. City Bank of Sherman.

(No. 2279, Op. Book No. 2, p. 653.)

Appeal from Grayson County.

Opinion by

Walker, R. S., P. J.

§ 1287. *Jurisdiction; on appeal the record must affirmatively show; where court a quo had none, appellate court does not acquire any.*On appeal from the county court to the court of appeals the record must affirmatively show that the county, court had jurisdiction of the cause, and how that jurisdiction was acquired. The court of appeals cannot ascertain the jurisdiction of the county court *aliunde*the record. [Chrisman v. Graham, 51 Tex. 454.] If the county court had no jurisdiction the court of appeals can acquire none by the appeal. [Horan v. Wahrenberger, 9 Tex. 313; 3 Tex. 157; 4 Tex. 223; 6 Tex. 263.] The record in this case showed that the county court did not have original jurisdiction of the *747subject matter of the suit, because both the amount of the judgment and the amount in controversy were less than $200, and there was nothing in the record to show that jurisdiction had been acquired by appeal or *certiorari.*

June 3, 1882.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40214 Summary Calendar

ANTONE RICHIE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WENDY M. WACKER, Mailroom Supervisor, Michael Unit; MARK A. WILSON, Senior Warden, Michael Unit, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:95-CV-573

- - - - - - - - - - August 26, 1996 Before KING, GARWOOD, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas prisoner Antone Richie, No. 506119, appeals the denial of his F ED . R. C IV . P. 59(e) motion to vacate the dismissal of his civil rights suit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Richie’s challenge to the propriety of the district court’s referral to the magistrate judge is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McCarthy v. Bronson , 500 U.S. 136, 139 (1991). We have reviewed the record and Richie’s brief and AFFIRM for essentially the sameNo. 96-40214 - 2 - reasons adopted by the district court. Richie v. Wacker , CA No. 6:95cv573 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 26, 1995 and Mar. 4, 1996).
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 439 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 439

   Supporting the goals and ideals of ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a 
             national celebration of after-school programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 2008

  Mrs. Lowey submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Supporting the goals and ideals of ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a 
             national celebration of after-school programs.

Whereas high-quality after-school programs provide safe, challenging, engaging, 
        and fun learning experiences to help children and youth develop their 
        social, emotional, physical, cultural and academic skills;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs support working families by ensuring 
        that their children are safe and productive after the regular school day 
        ends;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs build strong communities by involving 
        the Nation's students, parents, business leaders, and adult volunteers 
        in the lives of the Nation's young people, thereby promoting positive 
        relationships among children, youth, families, and adults;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs engage families, schools, and diverse 
        community partners in advancing the well-being of the Nation's children;
Whereas ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a national celebration of after-school 
        programs on October 16, 2008, promotes the critical importance of high-
        quality after-school programs in the lives of children, their families, 
        and their communities;
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children have parents who work outside the home, 
        and 14,300,000 children have no place to go after school; and
Whereas many after-school programs are struggling to keep their doors open and 
        their lights on: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress supports the goals and ideals of ``Lights On 
Afterschool!'', a national celebration of after-school programs.
                                 <all>
```
#### RICHARD CREMA v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE HISTORIC SMITHVILLE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.

March 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied. (See 192 *N.J.Super.*505)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON
FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       3,693,004
<SECURITIES>                                 1,363,786
<RECEIVABLES>                                  282,937
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    640,964
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,988,247
<PP&E>                                      20,350,035
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,354,258
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,987,768
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,319,452
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 20,296,557
<COMMON>                                     8,927,060
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,555,301)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,987,768
<SALES>                                        978,830
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               978,830
<CGS>                                          660,964
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  660,964
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (250,922)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (250,922)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (250,922)<F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
<FN>
<F1>NET LOSS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 OF $250,922, LESS
DIVIDENDS ON THE PREFERRED STOCK OF $245,100, LESS AMORTIZATION OF DISCOUNT ON
THE PREFERRED STOCK OF $809,907, LESS THE PREFERRED STOCK PENALTY OF
$2,184,259, RESULTS IN A NET LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS OF
$3,490,188.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.3

                                    GUARANTEE

      For value received, the undersigned hereby unconditionally guarantees, as
principal obligor and not only as a surety, to the Holder of this Note the cash
payments in United States dollars of principal of, premium, if any, and interest
on this Note (and including Additional Interest payable thereon) in the amounts
and at the times when due and interest on the overdue principal, premium, if
any, and interest, if any, of this Note, if lawful, and the payment or
performance of all other Obligations of the Company under the Indenture (as
defined below) or the Note, to the Holder of this Note and the Trustee, all in
accordance with and subject to the terms and limitations of this Note, Article
III of the Indenture, the subordination provisions of Article XV of the
Indenture and this Guarantee. This Guarantee will become effective in accordance
with Article XV of the Indenture and its terms shall be evidenced therein. The
validity and enforceability of this Guarantee shall not be affected by the fact
that it is not affixed to any particular Note. Capitalized terms used but not
defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Indenture dated
as of December 3, 2003, among Lions Gate Entertainment Inc., a Delaware
corporation, as issuer (the "Company"), Lions Gate Entertainment Corp, a British
Columbia corporation, as guarantor (the "Guarantor") and J.P. Morgan Trust
Company, National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee") (as amended or
supplemented, the "Indenture").

      THIS GUARANTEE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK BUT WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO APPLICABLE PRINCIPLES
OF CONFLICTS OF LAW TO THE EXTENT THAT THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW OF ANOTHER
JURISDICTION WOULD BE REQUIRED THEREBY. The Guarantor hereby agrees to submit to
the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of New York in any action or
proceeding arising out of or relating to this Guarantee.

      This Guarantee is subject to release upon the terms set forth in the
Indenture.

Date: December 3, 2003


                                       LIONS GATE ENTERTAINMENT CORP.


                                    By:
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name:
                                           Title:
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 41 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 41

  To provide a permanent deduction for State and local general sales 
                                 taxes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 22 (legislative day, January 3), 2013

  Ms. Cantwell (for herself, Mr. Enzi, and Mr. Nelson) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide a permanent deduction for State and local general sales 
                                 taxes.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF DEDUCTION FOR STATE AND LOCAL GENERAL 
              SALES TAXES.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (I) of section 164(b)(5) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 205 of the 
American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, is amended by striking ``, and 
before January 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
News United States Air Force
 Changes to BE WELL mean more choices for AirmenPublished Aug. 8, 2013
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                The BE WELL program, an Air Force-wide program designed to provide Airmen and Air Force leaders with resources to optimize fitness and health, now offers more choices and increased flexibility, thanks to a revamp that went into effect July 1.
The Balanced Eating, Work Out Effectively, Living Longer, or BE WELL program, was redesigned based on input from Airmen, leaders and Air Force health promotion professionals. 
The result is a fully customizable program structured to offer effective, targeted solutions in the areas of fitness, nutrition education, and dietary supplement safety, according to Air Force Health Promotion, or AFHP, officials at the Air Force Medical Operations Agency, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas.
The new program offers access to a full suite of options, including a comprehensive online class, telephonic health coaching through Military OneSource, in-person classes on weight management with a fitness component and instructor-led workshops on cardiovascular and strength training. 
Options in the new BE WELL program will remain open to all Airmen and their families and the program will continue to be mandatory for those with unsatisfactory fitness scores. Members with unsatisfactory scores will collaborate with their unit fitness program manager and their commander to choose the one or more options that will best help them meet their fitness goals, said Lt. Col. Trisha Vorachek, the Air Force Health Promotion chief.
Leadership teams can request information and support from their installation Air Force health promotion professionals.
*(Courtesy of Air Force Surgeon General Public Affairs)*health 



doctors 



nutrition 



fitness 



well being 



wellness 



warrior care 



care 



aid 



medical 



BE WELL Related Links
        Facebook - Air Force Health Promotion
            
            Air Force Surgeon General
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 67 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.67
                                             Agreed to February 17, 2007

                       One Hundred Tenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and seven

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),  
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Friday, February 
16, 2007, or Saturday, February 17, 2007, on a motion offered pursuant 
to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 
it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, or until 
the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate recesses 
or adjourns on any day from Saturday, February 17, 2007, through 
Saturday, February 24, 2007, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, February 26, 2007, or such 
other time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or 
his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time of 
any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 
consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the Minority 
Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the House and the 
Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place and time as they may 
designate if, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2833 

To improve the establishment of any lower ground-level ozone standards, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 17 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 16), 2014 

Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. VITTER, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. 

INHOFE, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. WICKER, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. 

BLUNT, Mr. COATS, Mr. JOHANNS, and Mr. BOOZMAN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To improve the establishment of any lower ground-level ozone 

standards, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clean Air, Strong 

5 Economies Act’’ or the ‘‘CASE Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. GROUND-LEVEL OZONE STANDARDS. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of law (includ8 ing regulations), in promulgating a national primary or 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2833 IS

1 secondary ambient air quality standard for ozone, the Ad2 ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency— 

3 (1) shall not propose a national primary or sec4 ondary ambient air quality standard for ozone that 

5 is lower than the standard established under section 

6 50.15 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as 

7 in effect on January 1, 2014), until at least 85 per8 cent of the counties that were nonattainment areas 

9 under that standard as of January 1, 2014, achieve 

10 full compliance with that standard; 

11 (2) shall only consider all or part of a county 

12 to be a nonattainment area under the standard on 

13 the basis of direct air quality monitoring; 

14 (3) shall take into consideration feasibility and 

15 cost; and 

16 (4) shall include in the regulatory impact anal17 ysis for the proposed and final rule at least 1 anal18 ysis that does not include any calculation of benefits 

19 resulting from reducing emissions of any pollutant 

20 other than ozone. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### ROY PETERSEN v. BARBARA PETERSEN BERLIN.

January 17, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ABDO QUHSHI.

February 6, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.