alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1


 


Second
Amendment to Employment Agreement


 


This
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Second Amendment”) is entered into as of this February 8, 2021
and is effective as of January 1, 2021, by and between Avraham Gabay, an individual residing in Jerusalem, Israel (the
“Executive”), and ORAMED Ltd., a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel, with an
address at Mamilla 20, Jerusalem, Israel 9414904 (the “Company”).


 


WHEREAS,
the Company and the Executive entered into an employment agreement, dated as of May 16, 2019 as amended on December 19, 2019
(the “Original Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS,
Company and the Executive desire to amend the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement to increase the Executive’s
salary.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the Company and the Executive agree as follows:


 


1.
In Section 2.1(a) - Salary of the Original Agreement, the following paragraph is hereby added:


 


As
of January 1, 2020, the Executive shall be entitled to a gross monthly salary of NIS 44,275 (the “Salary”).


 


2.
In Section 2.2 – Company Vehicle of the Original Agreement, the following paragraph is hereby added:


 


Should
the Executive choose not to use a car as described in this section 2.2, he will be entitled to a gross monthly amount of NIS 4,800
(instead of statutory travel expenses from home to the office and back).


 


3.
Except for the changes and/or additions stated herein, all the other terms of the Original Agreement shall remain valid and
bind the parties without any change. In the case of a contradiction between the provisions of this Second Amendment and the
provisions of the Original Agreement, the provisions of this Second Amendment shall prevail. Without limiting the generality
of the foregoing, the term “Agreement” as used in the Original Agreement shall be deemed to be the Original
Agreement as amended by this Second Amendment.


 






     


     


    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment to Employment Agreement as of February 8, 2021.


 





	 	Oramed Ltd.
	 	 
	 	/s/
Nadav Kidron
	 	Nadav
Kidron, CEO
	 	 
	 	/s/
Avraham Gabay
	 	Avraham
Gabay
NO. 07-09-0324-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL C

	NOVEMBER 5, 2009

	______________________________

	WENDELL H. TAYLOR,

									Appellant

	V.

	ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,

									Appellee

	______________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2008-562,834; HON. PAULA DAVIS LANEHART, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

		ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

	Appellant Wendell H. Taylor appeals as an indigent from the final judgment of the trial court.  On October 30, 2009, the County Clerk of Lubbock County filed a formal contest to Taylor’s request to proceed as an indigent.

	Per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(e), the court clerk may contest an affidavit of indigency.  Consequently, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the County Court of Law No. 3 of Lubbock County (trial court) for further proceedings.  Upon remand, the trial court shall undertake those proceedings necessary (which may include an evidentiary hearing) to determine:

	1.  whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal; and

	2.  whether appellant is indigent and unable to pay all or some of the costs which may be incurred in prosecuting the appeal.

	The trial court thereafter shall issue an appropriate order addressing the foregoing matters and cause the order to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before December 4, 2009.  So too shall it cause any hearing it may hold to be transcribed, which transcription along with any evidence received must then be filed with the clerk of this court by the same date.  Should further time be needed by the trial court to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before December 4, 2009.

	It is so ordered.

							Per Curiam
P 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR SPACE 

OPERATIONS 

TRANSPORTATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR SPACE TRACKING 

a DATA SYSTEMS 

ADMINISTRATOR 

DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR 

I I ASSISTANT I ADMINISTRATOR I F& 

EOUAL I OPPORTUNITY 

ASSISTANT 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR 

PROCUREMENT 

I I I 

ASSISTANT 

INSPECTOR ADMINISTRATOR 

LEGISLATIVE 

CHIEF 

ENGINEER 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR SPACE SCIENCE 

APPLICATIONS 

AND 1 

JET PROPULSION I LABORATORY 

GODDARD SPACE 

FLIGHT CENTER 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR AERONAUTICS AND I SPACE TECHNOLOGY 

LA RESEARCH CENTER 

LANGLEY 

RCSEARCH CENTER 

LEWIS 

RESEARCH CENTER 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR SPACE 

TRANSPORTATION 

SYSTEMS 

LYNDON B JOHNSON 

SPACECENTER 

JOHN F KENNEDY 

SPACE CENTER I 

GEORGE C MARSHALL 

SPACE FLIGHT I CENTER 

NATIONAL SPACE I TECHNOLOGY 

LABORATORIES 

Fl COMPTROLLER GENERAL 

COUNSEL 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR 

EXTERNAL 

RELATIONS 

&- 

I 1I 

James M. Beggs 

February 22, 1982 

ASSOCIATE 

DEPUTY 

ADMINISTRATOR 

ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR 

MANAGEMENT 

75
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7423

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM ODEN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Martinsburg

. John Preston Bailey , District Judge. ( 3:11

- cr - 00056

- JPB

- JES

- 1; 3:16

- cv 00047

- JPB

- JES )

Submitted : January 30, 2018 Decided: February 2, 2018

Before MOTZ and KEENAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Christopher William Oden, Appellant Pro Se. Erin K. Reisenweber, Assistant United States Attor ney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, Stephen Donald Warner, Assistant United States Attorney , OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher William Oden seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation o f the magistrate judge , denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion , and denying his motion for reconsideration . The order s are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (20 12). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstr ating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

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

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have indepe ndently reviewed the record and conclude that Oden has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Percy L. Boyd, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03497-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/26/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8788 Filed 11/10/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8788 Filed 11/10/17 Page 2 of 2
National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

(2) NASA contracts sourced in the state in FY21; see FY21 NASA Economic Impact Report (3) Categories are not additive. For more information on FY21 Sample Obligations, please visit: NASA Acquisition Internet Service (NAIS)

(1) For more information please visit: Value of NASA 

NASA Overall State Impact(1)

• Jobs Supported 454

• Economic Output $88,042,000

• State Tax Revenue $3,355,000

Moon to Mars Campaign State Impacts

• Jobs Supported 21

• Economic Output $4,331,000

• State Tax Revenue $168,000

Investments in Climate Change Research & 

Technology State Impacts

• Jobs Supported 185

• Economic Output $34,198,000

• State Tax Revenue $1,328,000

Sample Obligations(3)

Business $11,114,951 

• Other Than Small Business $3,612,320 

• Small Business $7,502,631 

 – 8(A) Program $0 

 – Economically Disadvantaged Women 

 Owned Small Business $0 

 – Historically Underutilized Business 

 (HUBZone) $0 

 – Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small

 Business $90,265 

 – Small Business Innovative Research $4,219,859 

 – Small Disadvantaged Business $15,550 

 – Veteran Owned Small Business $119,631 

 – Woman Owned Small Business $17,809 

 – Small Business Only $3,145,332 

Educational $15,592,238 

Government $0 

Non-profit Institutions $1,719,363 

Leading State-based NASA Business 

Contractors

Creare, LLC $4,616,233 

Nanocomp Technologies, Inc. $2,370,274 

Lyme Computer Systems, Inc. $970,853 

QmagiQ, LLC $874,988 

Skillsoft Corporation $431,400 

Leading State-based NASA Education Funding 

University of New Hampshire $10,672,296 

Dartmouth College $4,919,942 

Space Grant Consortium 

University of New Hampshire $800,000 

NEW HAMPSHIRE

FY21 State Procurement Investments (2) $33.5 M
For more information about the

Economic Impact Report

for your state, go to:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA Headquarters

300 E Street, SW

Washington, DC 20546

www.nasa.gov/centers

www.nasa.gov

James Webb Space Telescope

Cycle 1 Hours of Access

NASA Astronauts

(Former)

Lee Morin

Alan Shepard

There are 3 NASA Federal job and 267* contractors in the state 

of New Hampshire. 

For every NASA federal job located in New Hampshire, an 

additional 150.3** jobs are supported in the state economy. For 

every million dollars’ worth of economic output generated by 

NASA federal jobs, an additional $53** million worth of output is 

sustained throughout the state economy. 

* Indirect effects are the purchases of goods and services by 

government agencies and private sector contractors, as well as by 

the industries that supply them.

** Multiplier based on IMPLAN Input Output (I-O) model. To learn more, 

please visit: https://blog.implan.com/understanding-implan-multipliers

NEW HAMPSHIRE

454

NASA Jobs

Supported

Twenty-one New Hampshire suppliers contributed to NASA’s Artemis program. An example of the state’s contributions 

are the parts of the turbopumps on the RS-25 engine.

New Hampshire 

Institutions

101.4

Hours
Exhibit 32.1



Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of CarrAmerica Realty Corporation (the Company), each hereby certifies that, to
his knowledge on the date hereof:



|(a) | the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Thomas A. CarrThomas A. CarrChief Executive OfficerAugust 2, 2004/s/ Stephen E. RiffeeStephen E. RiffeeChief Financial OfficerAugust 2, 2004
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Space Operations 

Mission Directorate

Chief, Safety and Mission 

Assurance 

Kennedy Space 

Center

Marshall Space 

Flight Center 

Langley Research 

Center

Johnson Space 

Center

Armstrong Flight 

Research Center

Goddard Space 

Flight Center

Glenn Research 

Center

Ames Research 

Center

Administrator

Deputy Administrator*

Associate Administrator

Chief of Staff

Deputy Associate Administrator 

for Business Operations

Chief Engineer

Chief Health and Medical 

Officer

Chief Financial Officer Chief Information Officer

Diversity and Equal 

Opportunity 

Legislative and 

Intergovernmental Affairs 

International and 

Interagency Relations 

STEM Engagement

Communications

Advisory Groups

NAC and ASAP

Inspector General 

Chief Human Capital Officer Strategic Infrastructure

Procurement NASA Shared Services Center

Protective Services 

Aeronautics 

Research Mission 

Directorate 

Exploration Systems 

Development 

Mission Directorate

Science Mission 

Directorate 

Office of Technology, 

Policy, & Strategy

Mission Support 

Directorate

Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory*** 

Small Business 

Programs 

Stennis Space Center

NASA Office of JPL 

Management & 

Oversight ** 

Climate Advisor

Space Technology 

Mission Directorate

General Counsel

Chief Scientist / Senior 

Reporting Structure

Administrator Deputy 

Administrator

Associate 

Administrator

Deputy AA for 

Business Operations

Note: Administrator may delegate direct reports to Deputy Administrator at his/her discretion.

* Deputy Administrator designated as Chief Acquisition Officer (CAO).

** NOJMO oversees the Jet Propulsion Laboratory contract.

*** Programmatic reporting to the Science Mission Directorate Associate Administrator. 

www.nasa.gov JPL is a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). Feb 2022
The Honorable Rodney S. Webb, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 1 the District of North Dakota. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-4035

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of North Dakota. A.W.L., * * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: July 7, 1997 Filed: July 16, 1997

___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In thi s direct criminal appeal, A.W.L.--a minor--appeals the district court’s 1 adjudicationof him as a juvenile delinquent pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 5031-5042 for knowingly en gaging in sexual acts with a child under the age of 12 while in India n country, in violation o f 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1153. On appeal A.W.L. argues he is not an “Indian” under section 1153 , and therefore not subject to federal jurisdiction.-2-

Evidence adduced at t

he adjudication hearing established that although A.W.L. was not an enrolled member of the Tribe at the time of the offenses, he has 15/3 2 Indian blood; he held himself out to be Indian; he lived o n the reservation all of his life, attending reservation sc hools and receiving benefits of BIA schools; he was removed from the Tribe’s enroll ment only pending clarification of his paternity; and both of his parents--withwhom he lives--live and are respected as Indians. Our de novo review of the relevant factors, see United States v. Lawrence , 51 F.3d 150, 151-52 (8th Cir. 1995) (standard of review; factor s considered), leads us to the conclusion that A.W.L. is an “Indian” for purposes of section 11 53. See United States v. Keys , 103 F.3d 758, 761 (9th Cir. 1996) (tribal enrollment not sole means of proving status as Indian) ; United States v. Broncheau , 597 F.2d 1260, 1263 (9th Cir.) (noti ng “[e]nrollment is the commonevidentiary means of establishing Indian status, but it is not the only mean s nor is it necess arily determinative”), cert. denied , 444 U.S. 859 (1979); United States v. Dodge , 538 F.2d 770, 786 (8th Cir. 1976) (finding defendants who held themselves out to be Indians and who were of Indian blood to be Indians for purposes of § 1153), cert. denied , 429 U.S. 1099 (1977). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT 21

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



|                                          |  |                                          
|----------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                        |  | State or Sovereign Power of Incorporation
|Merix Nevada, Inc.                        |  | Oregon                                   
|Merix Europe B.V.                         |  | Netherlands                              
|Merix Asia, Inc.                          |  | Oregon                                   
|Merix Caymans Holding Company Limited     |  | Cayman Islands                           
|Merix Caymans Trading Company Limited     |  | Cayman Islands                           
|Merix Singapore Sales Pte. Ltd.           |  | Singapore                                
|Merix Manufacturing (Hong Kong) Ltd.      |  | Hong Kong                                
|Merix U.K. Limited                        |  | United Kingdom                           
|Merix Circuits Corp.                      |  | Canada                                   
|Merix Holding (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.       |  | Singapore                                
|Merix Printed Circuits (Huizhou) Limited  |  | Peoples Republic of China               
|Merix Printed Circuits Technology Limited |  | Peoples Republic of China
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Leejay Lockhart","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/llockha1\/","title":"Apollo to Artemis: Drilling on the Moon","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"O6760v437X\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/kennedy\/apollo-to-artemis-drilling-on-the-moon\/\">Apollo to Artemis: Drilling on the Moon<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/kennedy\/apollo-to-artemis-drilling-on-the-moon\/embed\/#?secret=O6760v437X\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Apollo to Artemis: Drilling on the Moon” — NASA\" data-secret=\"O6760v437X\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/a15pan11845-7_1.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":285}