alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
10.21


 


SUBLEASE
AGREEMENT


This
is an agreement to sublet office space located at 4700 Spring Street, Suite 304, La Mesa, California 91942 according to the terms
specified below.


 


The
sublessor agrees to sublet and the subtenant agrees to take the premises described below. Both parties agree to keep, perform
and fulfill the promises, conditions and agreements below:


 


1.
The sublessor is: Entest Biomedical, Inc.


 


2.
The subtenant is: Regen Biopharma, Inc.


 


3.
The term of this sublease is month to month beginning October 1, 2014.


 


4.
The rent payable to the sublessor by the subtenant is equal to the rent payable to the lessor by the sublessor and is to be paid
in at such time specified in accordance with the original lease agreement between the sublessor and the lessor.


 


5.
All charges for utilities connected with premises which are to be paid by the sublessor under the master lease shall be paid by
the subtenant for the term of this sublease.


 


6.
Subtenant agrees to surrender and deliver to the sublessor the premises and all furniture and decorations within the premises
in as good a condition as they were at the beginning of the term, reasonable wear and tear excepted. The subtenant will be liable
to the sublessor for any damages occurring to the premises or the contents thereof or to the building which are done by the subtenant.


 


7.
In the event of any legal action concerning this sublease, the losing party shall pay to the prevailing party reasonable attorney’s
fees and court costs to be fixed by the court wherein such judgment shall be entered.


 


The
parties hereby bind themselves to this agreement by their signatures affixed below on this First Day of October , 2014.


 


	Entest
    Biomedical, Inc.	Regen
    Biopharma Inc.
	By:/s/David
                                         Koos
	By:/s/
                                         David Koos

	President	President
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2


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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Intelligroup,
Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, David J. Distel, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         (1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
              13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
                    of 1934, as amended; and

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

DATE: May 14, 2004                                   By: /s/ David J. Distel
                                                        --------------------
                                                     David J. Distel
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language of such filing.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6968
ISMAIL MUHAMMAD, a/k/a Wayne Anthony Garrett, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusRON ANGELONE, Director; ANDREW WINSTON, Chairman, Virginia Board of Corrections; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; BOARD OF CORRECTIONS OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-356-R) Submitted: October 23, 1997 Decided: November 17, 1997 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ismail Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint and from its order denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Muhammad v. Angelone , No. CA-97-356-R (W.D. Va. June 20, 1997; July 2, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

BATOUL (DARWISH) DARWICHE,

Appellant,

v.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON f/k/a THE BANK OF NEW YORK, 

As Trustee For The Certificateholders of CWMBS 2003-60; ABDEL 

(DARWISH) DARWICHE; Unknown Spouse of Abdel Darwish If Any; 

Unknown Spouse Of Batoul Darwiche If Any; Any And All Unknown 

Parties Claiming By, Through, Under, And Against The Herein Named 

Individual Defendant(s) Who Are Not Known To Be Dead Or Alive, 

Whether Said Unknown Parties May Claim An Interest As Spouses, 

Heirs, Devisees, Grantees Or Other Claimants; HIBBS GROVE 

PLANTATION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; HSBC MORTGAGE 

CORPORATION (USA); JOHN DOE and JANE DOE, As Unknown 

Tenants In Possession,

Appellees.

No. 4D17-1772

[June 21, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Barry J. Stone, Judge; L.T. Case No. 09-041676 CACE 

(11).

Nicole R. Moskowitz of Neustein Law Group, P.A., Aventura, for 

appellant.

Nancy M. Wallace and Ryan D. O'Connor of Akerman LLP, 

Tallahassee; and William P. Heller of Akerman LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellee The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York, As 

Trustee For The Certificateholders of CWMBS 2003-60.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *
2

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Javier ALVAREZ-SALVADOR, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-71877.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.*

Filed March 10, 2011.

Javier Alvarez-Salvador, Spokane, WA, for Petitioner.

Remi Adalemo, Blair O’Connor, Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Offiee of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Javier Alvarez-Salvador, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion *746to reconsider a prior order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, *Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005), we deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Alvarez-Salvador’s motion to reconsider because he failed to identify any errors of fact or law in the IJ’s prior decision. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(2).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>              5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  CONTAINED IN THE SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 QUARTERLY REPORT
     FILED ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             138,976
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   138,976
<PP&E>                                               7,079
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (1,544)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     268,128
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,394,634
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             7,900
<OTHER-SE>                                      (4,134,406)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       268,128
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      719,727
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  39,022
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (758,749)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (250,000)
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,008,749)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.13)
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit-23.1

To the Board of Directors
AMCON Distributing Company
Omaha, Nebraska

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-45338 on form S-8 of our report on the consolidated financial statements
dated November 6, 2007, which report expresses an unqualified opinion, and our
report on the 2007 information in the consolidated financial statement
schedule, which expresses an unqualified opinion of AMCON Distributing Company
and subsidiaries, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of AMCON
Distributing Company and subsidiaries for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2007, respectively.

The Company's financial statements include a restatement for a change in
accounting method.


/s/ McGladrey & Pullen LLP
Omaha, Nebraska
November 6, 2007
_____________

No. 96-3078SD

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of South Dakota.

Barry Douglas Stead, also *

known as Barry D. Snead, also * [UNPUBLISHED]

known as Garitano, also known *

as Horelio Garitano, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________

Submitted: February 13, 1997

 Filed: March 6, 1997

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, JOHN R. GIBSON, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Barry Douglas Stead challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to

support his convictions for second-degree murder and assaulting a federal

officer. Contrary to Stead’s view, the record contains strong evidence of

Stead’s guilt. Essentially, Stead asks this court to reexamine conflicting

testimony, a task that can only be resolved by the jury. Here,

notwithstanding a full array of defensive instructions, the jury resolved

the conflicts in favor of the Government, and there was sufficient evidence

for the jury to reach its verdicts. Stead also challenges the sentence

imposed by the district court. Although Stead argues the district court

improperly failed to depart downward, the district court made clear that

it did not find a downward departure warranted by the facts in this case.

Thus, the district court’s refusal to depart is a
-2-

nonreviewable exercise of discretion. We affirm Stead’s convictions and

sentence. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge, concurs in the result and in the judgment

in this case.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2832 

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a strategy and timeline 

for the repayment of assistance received by financial institutions under 

the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 11, 2009 

Mr. EDWARDS of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a strategy and timeline for the repayment of assistance received 

by financial institutions under the Troubled Asset Relief 

Program, 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 ‘‘Taxpayer Repayment 

5 Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TIMELINE FOR REPAYMENT OF TARP FUNDS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury 

8 shall develop a strategy and timeline for the repayment 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2832 IH

1 of all assistance received by financial institutions under 

2 TARP. 

3 (b) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.—Not more than 6 

4 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 

5 Secretary of the Treasury shall issue a report to the Con6 gress containing— 

7 (1) the strategy and timeline developed under 

8 subsection (a); 

9 (2) the date by which the Secretary expects to 

10 have received all repayment of assistance received by 

11 financial institutions under TARP; 

12 (3) the date by which the Secretary expects the 

13 Government to have divested itself of all assets ac14 quired under TARP; and 

15 (4) the date by which the Secretary expects to 

16 have recovered all TARP funds spent on insuring 

17 troubled assets. 

18 (c) TARP DEFINED.—For purposes of this section, 

19 the term ‘‘TARP’’ means the Troubled Asset Relief Pro20 gram under title I of the Emergency Economic Stabiliza21 tion Act of 2008. 

Æ 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 17, 2016. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, August 17, 2016 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16D0480. ANTHONY B. MOORE v. JANEENE H. MOORE-MCKINNEY.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 14CV00232
Exhibit 99.1

[KeyBank Letterhead]

June 30, 2000

The Chase Manhattan Bank
Corporate Trust Office
Chase Manhattan Bank, Trustee
450 W. 33rd Street, 14th Floor
New York, NY 10001

Attention: Jeannie Chin

In accordance with Section 13.10 of the Standard Terms and Conditions of
Agreement for AFG 1996-A Grantor Trust, AFG 1996-B Grantor Trust, AFG 1996-C
Grantor Trust, and AFG 1996-D Grantor Trust. Key Bank USA, National
Association, successor to AutoFinance Group, Inc., as Servicer, I hereby
certify:



|1. |  | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from July
1, 1999 to June 30, 2000, and of its performance under the Agreement has been
made under my supervision, and
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  
|2. |  | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreements during such period.                                         

Sincerely,

/s/ Michael R. Cavalco

Michael R. Cavalco
Vice President
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 196 (Thursday, October 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22037]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of notice required under 39 U.S.C. 3642(d)(1): October 12, 
2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 6, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail 
Contract 367 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-4, CP2018-6.

Elizabeth A. Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2017-22037 Filed 10-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
1 5 1 7 WE S T F R O N T S T R E E T S U I T E 3 5 4 TYL E R , TX 7 5 7 0 2 T E L : 9 0 3 - 5 9 3 - 8 4 7 1 FA X : 9 0 3 - 5 9 3 - 2 1 9 3 Serving Anderson, Angelina, Cherokee, Gregg, Henderson, Houston, Nacogdoches, Rains, Rusk, Sabine, San Augustine, Shelby, Smith , Trinity, Upshur, Van Zandt and Wood Counties www.12thcoa.courts.state.tx.us C HIEF J USTICE J AMES T. W ORTHEN J USTICES B RIAN H OYLE G REG N EELEY 

# T W E L F T H 

# C O U R T O F 

# A P P EA L S C LERK C ATHY S. L USK C HIEF S TAFF A TTORNEY M ARGARET H USSEY 

## May 4, 2015 Ms. Lois Rogers District Clerk, Smith County Courthouse, Suite 204 100 North Broadway Avenue Tyler, TX 75702-7201 * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * RE: Case Number: 12-14-00062-CR, 12-14-00063-CR Trial Court Case Number: 114-0054-12, 114-0055-12 Style: Coby Robert Gordy v. The State of Texas Pursuant to Rule 18.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, enclosed herewith is the Mandate issued in the above causes. When the District or County Clerk has executed the Mandate in accordance with the opinion of this Court, the Clerk is requested to fill in the information below and to return the attached copy to this office. Very truly yours, CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK By:_____________________________ Katrina McClenny, Chief Deputy Clerk CC: Mr. Michael J. West (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) Mr. James W. Huggler Jr. (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) Mandate executed on __ 5TH day of _____MAY___________, 2015. Brief explanation of action taken: ________ SCANNED ________________________________

_________________LINDA RHYMES _______________________________District/County Clerk FILE COPY
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,868
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              99
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,452
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          34,507
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            34,453
<LOANS>                                         60,310
<ALLOWANCE>                                        811
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 105,196
<DEPOSITS>                                      93,447
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,002
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,100
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,647
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 105,196
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  4,624
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,514
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   243
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 6,381
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,745
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,745
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,636
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      250
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,551
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    941
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         941
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       558
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.02
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   593
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       65
<RECOVERIES>                                        33
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  811
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1
Agreement Regarding Disclosure of Long-Term Debt Instruments
     In reliance upon Item 601(b)(4)(iii)(A) of Regulation S-K, AIMCO Properties, L.P., a Delawarelimited partnership (the “Partnership”), has not filed as an exhibit to its Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, any instrument with respect to long-term debt not beingregistered where the total amount of securities authorized thereunder does not exceed ten percentof the total assets of the Partnership and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. Pursuant toItem 601(b)(4)(iii)(A) of Regulation S-K, the Partnership hereby agrees to furnish a copy of anysuch agreement to the Securities Exchange Commission upon request.         AIMCO Properties, L.P.         By: AIMCO-GP, Inc., its general partner        By:    /s/ Paul J. McAuliffe          Paul J. McAuliffe     Executive Vice President and Chief Financial     Officer