alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10(s)


 


AMENDMENT NO.1 TO EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment No. 1 to Executive Agreement
made as of August 28, 2014 by and between Sono-Tek Corporation, a New York corporation with its principal office at 2012 Route
9W, Building 3, Milton, NY 12547 (the “Company”), and Christopher L. Coccio, residing at PO Box 3543, Saratoga Springs
NY 12866, (“Executive”), who are parties to that certain Executive Agreement dated as of September 1, 2007, (the “Agreement”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to
amend the Agreement to change the number of years, from one to two, of the Executive’s annual base and bonus compensation
that will be paid to the Executive in the case of a Change of Control.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
premises and the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Executive hereby agree as follows:


 


1.       Amendment. Section 3 (a)
of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“Except as may otherwise be required in accordance
with Section 8 hereof, in the event that a Change of Control of the Company shall occur during the time Executive is employed by
the Company, there shall be payable to Executive upon the termination of Executive's employment without Cause or Executive's Resignation
for Good Reason (as hereinafter defined) within 18 months following such Change of Control a lump sum (net of any required tax
or other withholding) equal to two years of Executive's annual base, bonus and commission compensation paid by the Company for
the previous two calendar years (or such lesser period as Executive shall have been employed by the Company) immediately preceding
the Change of Control as reflected in Executive's Forms W-2 in respect of such years. Payment made in accordance with this Section
3(a) shall represent full satisfaction of all of the obligations of the Company under this Executive Agreement and concurrent with
receipt of such payment Executive shall execute a document satisfactory to the Company to that effect.”


 


2.       Agreement. The parties hereto
acknowledge and agree that, other than as set forth in this Amendment, the Agreement remains unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


3.       Entire Agreement. This Amendment
No. 1, taken together with the Agreement (to the extent not expressly amended hereby) represent the entire agreement of the parties,
supersede any and all previous contracts, arrangements or understandings between the parties with respect to the subject matter
hereof, and may be amended at any time only by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto.


 


 




    	 



    	 



    

4.      Counterparts. This Amendment No.
1 may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original and all of which will together constitute one
and the same instrument.


.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument is executed
as of the date first above written.


 


SONO-TEK CORPORATION


By: /s/ R. Stephen Harshbarger


President


 


/s/ Christopher L. Coccio


Executive
**EXHIBIT 31.4**

 

**SYMBION, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Teresa F. Sparks, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/Aof Symbion, Inc.; and

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report.

 

 
|   | /s/ Teresa F. Sparks              |
|--------|-----------------------------------|
|   | Teresa F. Sparks                  |
|   | Senior Vice President  of Finance |
|   | and Chief Financial Officer       |

Date: June 17,2009

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 76343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29844]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Neurological Sciences Training Initial Review 
Group; NST-2 Subcommittee.
    Date: March 9-10, 2015.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: The Fairmont Washington, DC, 2401 M Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20037.
    Contact Person: Elizabeth A. Webber, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, 
NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 
3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-1917, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c7b696e6e697e694c616d656022626564226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7700121515120512371a161e1b59191e1f59101801">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 16, 2014.
Carolyn Baum,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-29844 Filed 12-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


              In connection with the Annual Report of Score One, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Hoi-ho Kiu, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and Lai Ming Lau, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

               (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                    all material respects, the consolidated financial condition
                    of the Company as of the dates presented and the
                    consolidated result of operations of the Company for the
                    periods presented.



                                                ------------------------------
                                                Hoi-ho Kiu
                                                Chief Executive Officer
                                                April 19, 2006



                                                ------------------------------
                                                Lai Ming Lau
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                April 19, 2006
1 ... SeeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OFAPPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 08 - 16 1- CR NO . 02- 08- 162- CR F R E DE R I CKD. OS B OR NE AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 371STDI STRI CTCO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

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

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppe l l ant Fr ede r i ck D . O sb or ne app ea l s hi s con vi ct i onsan d s ent enc esf or a g g ra v a te d s e x u a l a s s a u l t o fa c h i l d . S eeT e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § 2 2 .0 2 1 (a )(2 )(B ) (V e rn o n S u p p . 2 0 0 8 ). W e w i l l a ffir m . A p p e l l a n t’ s c o u rt -ap p o i n ted ap p e l l a te c o u n se l h a s fil e d a m o ti o n to w i t hdr aw as counsel and a br i efi n suppo rtoft hatm ot i on. I n t he br i ef , counsel2

aver s t hat , i n herp r of essi onal o pi ni on, the app eali s f r i vol ous. C oun sel ’ s br i ef a n d m o ti o n m e e t t h e req u i rem e n ts o f A n der sv. Ca lif

o r niab y pr es ent i ng a p r o f e s s io n a l e v a lu a t io n o f t h e r e c o r d d e m o n s t r a t in g w h yt h e r e a r e n o a r g u a b le gr oundsf orr el i ef . 386 U . S. 738, 87 S. Ct . 1396 ( 196 7) . W e g aveap pel l ant t he opp ort uni t y t o f i l e a pr o se br i ef , an d he has not f i l ed one. The S t at e al so h a s n o t f i l e d a b ri e f. O nce an appel l ant ’ s court - appo i nt ed at t or ney f i l es a m ot i on t o w i t hdr aw on t he gr ound t hat t he app ea l i s f r i vol ous and f ul f i l l s t he r equ i r em en t s of A n ders , t hi s cou rti s obl i gat ed t o unde rt ak e an i nde pen den t exa m i nat i on oft he re c o rd . Se eS taffo rd v. S tate , 8 1 3 S .W .2 d 5 0 3 , 5 1 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 ); Mays v. State, 904 S . W . 2d 920, 922– 23 ( Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h 1995, no p e t.). O n l y th e n m a y w e g ra n t c o u n s e l ’s m o ti o n to w i th d ra w . See Pens on v. Ohi o, 4 8 8 U .S . 7 5 , 8 2

– 8 3 , 1 0 9 S . C t. 3 4 6 , 3 5 1 (1 9 8 8 ). W e have car ef ul l y r ev i ew ed t he r ecor d and cou nsel ’ s br i ef . W e agr ee w i t h c ouns elt hatt hi s app ea l i s w ho l l y f r i vol ousan d w i t houtm er i t ; w e f i nd n o th i n g in t h ere c o rd t h a t m i g h t a rg u a b l ys u p p o rt t h e a p p e a l . See Bl eds oe v. S tate, 1 7 8 S .W .3 d 8 2 4 , 8 2 7

– 2 8 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ); se e al soMeza v.3

S tate, 2 0 6 S .W .3 d 6 8 4 , 6 8 5 n .6 ( T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ). A c c o rd i n g l y , w e g ra n t c o u n s e l ’sm o ti o n to w i th d ra w a n d a ffir m th e tri a l c o u rt’sj u d g m e n ts . P E RCU R I AM PA N EL: M EI ER, G A RD N ER, an d W A LKER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Apr i l 30, 2009
EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of CreditRiskMonitor.com, Inc. ("CRM")
on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Lawrence Fensterstock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 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/ Lawrence Fensterstock
                                                Lawrence Fensterstock
                                                Chief Financial Officer

May 15, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to CRM and will be retained by CRM and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GEORGE L. MORTENSEN,

 

 Appellant,

v.

DANIEL VILLEGAS AND ELVIA L. 

RAMIREZ,

Appellees.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00080-CV

Appeal from the

Probate Court No. 1

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2010-P00681)

O R D E R

On March 27, 2019, this Court issued an order for mediation referral. The order required 

the parties to make any objection to referral within ten days of the order. On March 29, 2019

Appellees filed an objection. The Court finds Appellees’ objection persuasive.

Therefore, the Court ORDERS this appeal to continue, the appellate timetable suspension 

is lifted and the Record shall be filed in this Court on or before May 1, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1

st day of April, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1847 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Senate, Office of 

the President Pro Tempore for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Senate, Office of the President Pro Tempore for fiscal year 

2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 SENATE, OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT PRO 

5 TEMPORE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise availVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:35 Apr 13, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1847.IH H1847

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1847 IH

1 able for Senate, Office of the President Pro Tempore for 

2 fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $744,466. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### Buyer’s First Choice, Inc., Doing Business as 2.5% Real Estate Direct, Appellant, v Joanne Simme, Also Known as Joanne Simme-Good, Doing Business as Good Choice, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 1.)

[967 NYS2d 273]

Appeal from an order of the Erie County Court (Thomas P Franczyk, J.), entered October 12, 2011. The order, among other things, denied the motion of plaintiff for summary judgment.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal insofar as it concerns the counterclaim in the answer is unanimously dismissed and the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced the instant action seeking damages for defendant’s alleged breach of her duty of loyalty to plaintiff while she was associated with plaintiff as an independent contractor/real estate broker. According to plaintiff, defendant breached her duty of loyalty to plaintiff by communicating with an individual and arranging a meeting with her to list and sell her property.

In appeal No. 1, plaintiff appeals from an order that, inter alia, denied its motion for summary judgment on the cause of action for breach of the duty of loyalty and for dismissal of the counterclaim in defendant’s answer, and granted defendant leave to amend her answer. In appeal No. 2, plaintiff appeals from an order that denied its motion seeking, inter alia, to dismiss the counterclaim in the amended answer and second amended answer pursuant to CPBR 3211 (a) (7), for failure to state a cause of action.

With respect to appeal No. 1, we note at the outset that plaintiffs appeal from the order insofar as it denied that part of *1385plaintiffs motion to dismiss the counterclaim in defendant's answer must be dismissed. Inasmuch as the answer in appeal No. 1 was superseded by defendant’s subsequent amended answer and second amended answer, “issues involving the original [answer] are moot” *(Sutton Inv. Corp. v City of Syracuse,*12 AD3d 1201, 1201 [2004]). We otherwise affirm the order in appeal No. 1. We conclude in particular that County Court properly denied that part of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the cause of action for breach of the duty of loyalty. There is no written agreement between the parties setting forth the nature of their relationship and the scope of defendant’s duties, and we conclude that there are triable issues of fact whether defendant was required to bring all leads concerning potential clients to plaintiff or whether she was to work only with plaintiffs existing clients *(see Bynog v Cipriani*Group, 1 NY3d 193, 198 [2003], *rearg denied*2 NY3d 794 [2004]; *see also G.K. Alan Assoc., Inc. v Lazzari,*44 AD3d 95, 103 [2007], *affd*10 NY3d 941 [2008]).

We conclude in appeal No. 2 that the court properly denied that part of plaintiffs motion to dismiss the counterclaim in defendant’s second amended answer. Contrary to plaintiffs contention, the counterclaim does not fail to state a cause of action *(see generally*CPLR 3026; *Leon v Martinez,*84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Sconiers, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-115700, 333-123962,333-132588, and 333-141379 on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 26, 2008, relating to thefinancial statements and financial statement schedule of Blue Nile, Inc., which reports express anunqualified opinion and include explanatory paragraphs regarding the Company’s adoption ofStatement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), *Share-Based Payment,*and Staff AccountingBulletin No. 108, *Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements When QuantifyingMisstatements in Current Year Financial Statements,*and the effectiveness of Blue Nile Inc.’sinternal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of BlueNile, Inc. for the year ended December 30, 2007./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPSeattle, Washington
Case 1:09-cv-00238-CG-B Document 53 Filed 01/05/10 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:09-cv-00238-CG-B Document 53 Filed 01/05/10 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:09-cv-00238-CG-B Document 53 Filed 01/05/10 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:09-cv-00238-CG-B Document 53 Filed 01/05/10 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:09-cv-00238-CG-B Document 53 Filed 01/05/10 Page 5 of 5
J-A04040-24

2024 PA Super 75

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

HEATHER A. DUNCAN 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 1103 EDA 2023

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered April 10, 2023

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at 

No(s): CP-51-CR-0007608-2021

BEFORE: STABILE, J., McLAUGHLIN, J., and COLINS, J.*

DISSENTING OPINION BY McLAUGHLIN, J.: FILED APRIL 17, 2024

I respectfully dissent. There was ample circumstantial evidence to 

support the inference that Duncan was “under the combined influence of 

alcohol and a drug or combination of drugs.” Not only did Officer Tueros testify 

about Duncan’s demeanor that was indicative of intoxication, but she also 

explained that she knew from professional experience that the cigarette bore 

the signs of having been dipped in PCP so that the smoker would ingest the 

drug. Added to that was Officer Tueros’s testimony that this all occurred in a 

neighborhood in which there was a high incidence of illegal narcotics sales. I 

must also point out that the body cam footage shows that the ground was dry, 

eliminating the possibility that the cigarette had been tracked into the car and 

was wet from rain. See Majority Op. at 3. I believe if we make all reasonable 

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A04040-24

- 2 -

inferences in the Commonwealth’s favor, as we must, the evidence was 

sufficient to prove Duncan’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Annette Douglas v. Anthony J. Douglas

Appellate case number: 01-10-00477-CV

Trial court case number: 2009-68489

Trial court: 310th District Court of Harris County

This case involves an appeal from a judgment signed on May 4, 2010. The record was 

due on July 5, 2010. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1(a), 35.1. The clerk’s record was filed on October 4, 

2012. The reporter’s record has not been filed.

On June 30, 2010, the court reporter responsible for preparing the record in this appeal 

informed the Court that appellant had not made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record. 

On August 6, 2012, this Court affirmed the trial court’s order sustaining a contest to appellant’s 

affidavit of indigence and ordered appellant to provide proof of having paid or made payment 

arrangements for preparation of the reporter’s record by September 5, 2012, or the Court would 

consider and decide only those issues or points that do not require a reporter’s record for a 

decision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). 

Appellant has not provided the Court with evidence showing that she has paid or made 

arrangements to pay the court reporter. Accordingly, the Court will consider and decide only 

those issues or points that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See id.

Appellant’s brief is ORDERED to be filed within 30 days of the date of this order. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellee’s brief, if any, is ORDERED to be filed within 30 days of the 

filing of appellant’s brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice James Sharp, Jr.

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 24, 2012
CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of FieldPoint Petroleum Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ray Reaves, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  _/s/ Ray Reaves___________ Ray Reaves Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer August 14, 2008