alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.44

Consultancy Agreement
Date: July 10, 2001

Parties:

BIOPROGRESS TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL INC., ('BTII') a corporation organised
under the State of Nevada, United States of America of Unit 1, Norwood Road,
March, Cambridgeshire PE15 8QD, England; and

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PHARMA, S.L, ('ATP') a company organised under the laws of
Spain, whose registered office is at Carretera de Irun, Km 26,200 28700 San
Sebastian de los Reyes, Madrid, Spain.

Appointment:

BTII herby appoints ATP as its consultant and ATP hereby accepts such
appointment on the terms and conditions set forth herein:

1) The term of appointment shall be the period covered by Clause 3 (b), (c) and
(d) of an Agreement for the Supply of the Prototype Pharmaceutical Machine
between BTII and Farmasierra S.A.

2) During the term BTII shall pay up to $[CONFIDENTIALITY REQUESTED] U.S to ATP
in respect of the services herein defined and payments shall be pro rata sums
paid by Farmasierra S.A. to BTII during the term. BTII shall pay ATP within one
(1) day of the receipt of funds from Farmasierra S.A.

3) During the term ATP shall provide the following services ('Services') to
BTII:

      o     ATP will liase with Farmasierra S.A. and with BTII to ensure that
            the XGel(tm) Film System fully meets the requirements of the
            pharmaceutical industry in terms of construction and operation;

      o     ATP will keep BTII informed of all matters that could affect the
            acceptance of the XGel(tm) Film System by the pharmaceutical
            industry;

      o     ATP will liase with Farmasierra S.A. to facilitate visits to
            Farmasierra's plant by customers and potential customers BTII,
            provided that Farmasierra shall at all times have full control of
            any such visit and shall at its sole discretion determine the scope
            and extent of such visit.

4) The parties agree to keep confidential all information relating to the
services to be performed under this Agreement and the commercial operations of
their respective businesses.

5) This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of England.

Signed: Graham Hind 10/07/01 for and on behalf of BioProgress Technology
International, Inc.

Signed: Tomas Olleros 10/07/01 for and on behalf of Advanced Techonology
Pharma, S.L.
[No. 68060-9-I.

Division One.

October 29, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Gerardo Jara-Aguirre, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 11-1-02435-7, James D. Cayce, J., entered December 9, 2011. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Exhibit
10.2


Executive Committee


Strategic
Executive Incentive Plan


The Compensation
Committee (the “Committee”) embraces a philosophy and guiding principles
designed to achieve enhancement of long-term shareholder value.  In line with these objectives, the
compensation program for senior corporate executive officers (the “Executive
Committee”) consists of (i) base salary, (ii) annual incentive compensation
opportunity consisting of a cash bonus if designated performance objectives are
achieved, and (iii) long-term incentive opportunity composed of equity based
awards related to enhancing the ongoing well being of the organization.


In addition to the
performance objectives as set forth in the Qualified Executive Performance
Plan, the Committee has established this Strategic Executive Incentive Plan
(the “Incentive Plan”) for Eligible Employees.


Eligible Employees
include:


·                  Epiq Systems, Inc. Chief Executive
Officer


·                  Epiq Systems, Inc. Chief Operating
Officer


·                  Epiq
Systems, Inc. Chief Financial Officer


Method and Timing of Payout


For payouts earned under
this Incentive Plan, the Committee, in it sole discretion, may make the payment
in either cash, stock options or restricted stock.  Amounts awarded under this Incentive Plan are
made under the Epiq Systems, Inc. Amended and Restated 2004 Equity Incentive
Plan (the “2004 Plan”) and are subject to limitations contained in the 2004
Plan.  Payments under this Incentive Plan
may be made from time to time at the sole discretion of the Committee.  This Incentive Plan is entirely independent
of any other executive compensation plan this Committee has or may establish,
and payment under any other plan is not and will not be contingent on the
satisfaction or non-satisfaction of the terms of this plan.



 1
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22141]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the NHLBI Special Emphasis Panel.
    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: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel; NHLBI Single Site CLTR Review.
    Date: November 6, 2017.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Chang Sook Kim, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and 
Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7188, Bethesda, MD 
20892-7924, 301-827-7940, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bcdfddced3d0d7d3fcd1ddd5d092d2d5d492dbd3ca"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="046765766b686f6b4469656d682a6a6d6c2a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)


    Dated: October 6, 2017.
 Michelle Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-22141 Filed 10-12-17; 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>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CENTURY SURETY COMPANY, 

an Ohio corporation,

 Plaintiff-counterdefendant - Appellee,

 v.

350 W.A., LLC, a California limited

liability company,

 Defendant-counterclaimant - Appellant,

DAVID A. BLACKBURN,

 Counter-claimant - 

Appellant,

 and

JACQUELINE HELLEIS, individually

and doing business as Flagship Research,

 Defendant.

No. 11-56694

D.C. No. 3:05-cv-01548-L-BGS

MEMORANDUM*

FILED

AUG 22 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

M. James Lorenz, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 9, 2013

Pasadena, California

Before: TALLMAN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Appellants David Blackburn and 350 W.A., LLC, appeal the district court’s

grant of summary judgment. We affirm. 

An insurance policy is properly rescinded when the insured makes material

misrepresentations when applying for insurance. See Cal. Ins. Code §§ 330, 331

(West 2005). Appellants made misrepresentations when applying for insurance

with Century by stating on their application form that they did not contemplate any

demolition exposure or structural additions when, in fact, they did. Contrary to

appellants’ argument, to “contemplate” means to consider the possibility of action;

it does not require firm and final decisions. 

Appellants’ misrepresentations were material. Misrepresentations are

material when the insurer would have evaluated the risk to be insured differently,

such as by denying the policy or charging different premiums, if the true facts had

been known. See Old Line Life Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 229 Cal. App. 3d 1600,

1606 (1991). Century produced undisputed evidence demonstrating that it would

2
have denied the policy, issued a different policy, or charged different premiums if

it had known the truth about the planned construction. Therefore, the district court

properly concluded that the insurance contract was rescinded.

As the policy has been rescinded, appellants’ counterclaims fail as a matter

of law. 

AFFIRMED.

3
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lashante TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10186

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Nov. 30, 2010.

Strider L. Dickson, United States Attorney’s Office, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Anne Schultz, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Miami, FL, Jeffrey H. Sloman, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for PlaintiffAppellee.

*861Howard J. Schumacher, Fort Lauder-dale, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Howard J. Schumacher, appointed counsel for Lashante Taylor in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Taylor’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
31.2





CERTIFICATION
OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





REQUIRED
BY RULE 13A - 14(A) OR RULE 15D - 14(A)





I,
   Bob Bates, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:





1.
  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Edgetech
Services Inc.





2.
  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.
  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4.
  The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer and have:





(a)
 Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;





(b)
 Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(c)
 Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and





5.  
The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control    over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):





(a) 
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and





(b)
 Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.





Date:
    June 15, 2009
                    /s/   Bob Bates


Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21744]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Open Mobile Alliance

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 7, 2017, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Open Mobile Alliance 
(``OMA'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Cisco Systems, Inc., Seattle, WA; Mind Reader, Hangzhou 
City, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Itron, Inc. Fort Worth, TX; and 
NewNet Communication Technologies, Inc., Bedford, NS, CANADA have been 
added as parties to this venture.
    Also, Anritsu Ltd., Bedfordshire, UNITED KINGDOM has withdrawn as a 
party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and OMA intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On March 18, 1998, OMA filed its original notification pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on December 
31, 1998 (63 FR 72333).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on January 26, 
2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on March 6, 2017 (82 FR 12639).

Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-21744 Filed 10-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Even assuming Corpuz did not consent to the blood draw, we have

recently held that, while the warrantless, nonconsensual search provided for in NRS 484C.160(7) is unconstitutional, the good-faith exception to the exclusionary remedy applies when an officer reasonably and in good faith relied on the constitution validity of the statute. 

### See Byars v. State,. Nev. , P.3d (Adv. Op. No. 85, October 16, 2014). Therefore,, the district court did not err by denying Corpuz's motion to suppress.

Next, Corpuz claims that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct. We review the denial of a motion for a new trial for an abuse of discretion. 

### See Steese u. State, 114 Nev. 479, 490, 960 P.2d 321, 328 (1998). When considering allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, we first determine whether the prosecutor's conduct was improper and then whether any improper conduct warrants reversal. 

### See Valdez u. State, 124 Nev. 1172, 1188, 196 P.3d 465, 476 (2008). Here, the prosecutor argued that Corpuz may have wanted to prove his car was faster than another, and Corpuz timely objected. After a brief bench conference, during which Corpuz claimed that the argument was not supported by evidence and was speculation, the district court sustained the objection, and the prosecutor immediately moved on. Even assuming that the argument constituted prosecutorial misconduct, we conclude that it was harmless error. 

### See Truesdell v. State, 129 Nev. , 304 P.3d 396, 402 (2013). Therefore,

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947Athe district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Corpuz's motion

for a new trial.

Having considered Corpuz's claims and concluded that no relief is warranted, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Hardesty

° 

# D1774 j

. Douglas

cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge Mueller Hinds & Associates Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 3
(0) I947A
EXHIBIT 32.2
                               ------------

                              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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K (the
"Report") of AMCON Distributing Company (the "Company") for the fiscal year
ended September 26, 2003, I, Michael D. James, Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to my knowledge, 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.


Date: December 24, 2003       /s/ Michael D. James
                              -------------------------
                              Title: Vice President and
                              Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to AMCON Distributing Company and will be retained by AMCON
Distributing Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 21.1.1**

 

**Subsidiariesof the Registrant**

** **
| **Subsidiary**                       | ** ** | **State of Incorporation** |
|--------------------------------------|------------|----------------------------|
|                                 |       |                       |
| TESSCO  Incorporated                 |       | Delaware                   |
| Wireless  Solutions Inc.             |       | Maryland                   |
| TESSCO Service  Solutions, Inc. |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO de Mexico  S.A. de C.V.       |       | Mexico                     |
| TESSCO  Communications Incorporated  |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO Financial  Corporation        |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO  Business Services LLC        |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO  Supply Chain Services, LLC   |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO  Product Solutions, LLC       |       | Delaware                   |
| TESSCO  Integrated Solutions, LP     |       | Delaware                   |
| GW  Services Solutions, Inc.    |       | Delaware                   |

 

----
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**








CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE 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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Quick-Med
      Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended September 30,
      2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, David S. Lerner, President and principal executive officer
      of
      the Company, hereby certify, pursuant Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
      United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, that to my knowledge:





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




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








Dated:
      November 14, 2006     /s/
      David S. Lerner__________________


David S. Lerner


President (and Principal Executive Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended June
30, 2004 of Edelbrock Corporation (the Company) as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Aristedes T.
Feles, Vice- President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C. § 78m(a) or § 78o(d));
and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company. October 27, 2004
    /s/ ARISTEDES T. FELESAristedes T. FelesVice-President of Finance
and Chief Financial Officer
MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE

AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION



CORPORATE NAME:

Future Technologies, Inc.

This amendment is effective on April 20, 2001.

The following amendment of articles regulating the above corporation was adopted:  (Total number of pages including this form 1)



ARTICLE I
NAME

The name of this corporation shall be SE Global Equities Corp.

This amendment has been approved pursuant to Minnesota Statutes chapter 302A or 317A.  I certify that I am authorized to execute this amendment and I further certify that I understand that by signing this amendment, I am subject to the
penalties of perjury as set forth in section 609.48 as if I had signed this amendment under oath.

Dated: April 11, 2001

By:	/s/ Toby Chu
	Toby Chu,
	President of Future Technologies, Inc.