alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 10.42

                           PAYMENT OF PROMISSORY NOTE


                  Agreement dated as of June 9, 1997 by and between Royal
Canadian Foods Corp., a Delaware corporation, with offices at 1004 Second
Avenue, New York, NY 10022 ("Borrower") and Mark Schmerling, a resident of
Israel ("Lender").

                                    RECITALS

                  WHEREAS, pursuant to a Promissory Note dated April 18, 1997
(the "Note") by and between Borrower and Lender, Lender loaned Borrower
$21,760.00 (the "Loan").

                  WHEREAS, Lender and Borrower now agree that the principal due
on the Note shall be paid by the issuance of Common Stock of the Company (the
"Common Stock") to Lender.

                  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other
good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the
parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Payment of Loan Principal. Payment of the Loan shall be made by the issuance
of one share of Common Stock for every $2.00 of the principal balance due on the
Loan. A total of 10,880 shares of Common Stock shall be issued to Lender in
payment of the entire principal balance due on the Loan.

2. Offshore Securities Agreement. The parties hereto intend for the issuance of
the Common Stock to Lender to be in compliance with Regulation S of the
Securities Act of 1933. In view of this, Lender shall sign an Offshore
Securities Agreement for this transaction.

3. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall
constitute a single instrument.




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

ROYAL CANADIAN FOODS CORP.



By:_____________________________
       Sheldon Golumbia, President



By:_____________________________
       Mark Schmerling

                                        1
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. GT01-6-001]

Take notice that on January 29, 2001, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP (Gulf South) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective December 31, 2000:

First Revised Sheet No. 4000

First Revised Sheet No. 4001

First Revised Sheet No. 4002

Gulf South submitted the above referenced tariff sheets in accordance with the Commission's letter order issued January 22, 2001, in Docket No. GT01-6-000 to reflect its recent name change from Koch Gateway Pipeline Company to Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-3436  Filed 2-9-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I,Grayling Hofer, Chief Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer of PowerCold Corporation (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1.  This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed 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  2.  The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: August 11, 2006  /s/Grayling Hofer Grayling Hofer Chief Accounting Officer Principal Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9565-9566]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3255]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-205-000 and ER01-205-001]


Xcel Energy Services, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Order

February 2, 2001.
    Xcel Energy Services, Inc. (Xcel) submitted for filing a rate 
schedule under which Xcel will engage in wholesale electric power and 
energy transactions at market-based rates. Xcel also requested waiver 
of various Commission regulations. In particular, Xcel requested that 
the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all 
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Xcel.
    On January 30, 2001, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Corporate Applications, Office of Markets, Tariffs and 
Rates, granted requests for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to 
the following:
    Within thirty days of date of the order, any person desiring to be 
heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability by Xcel should file a motion to intervene or 
protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 
of the Commission's rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, Xcel is authorized 
to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a 
guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of 
another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some 
lawful object within the corporate purposes of the applicant, and 
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or 
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of Xcel's issuances of securities or assumptions of 
liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is March 1, 2001.
    Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Internet at

[[Page 9566]]

http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-3255 Filed 2-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Right Management Consultants, Inc.:

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
report included in this Form 10-K into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statements No. 333-06211, File No. 333-07975, File No. 33-58698,
File No. 33-62997, File No. 33-62999, File No. 333-84493 and File No. 333-84495.

                      /S/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
         March 29, 2000
1

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, DC 20004-1710

BEFORE: Jordan, Chair; Althen, Rajkovich, and Baker, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION: 

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 

§ 801 et seq. (2018) (“Mine Act”). On August 19, 2021, the Commission received from Dragon 

Products Company, LLC (“Dragon”) a motion seeking to reopen a penalty assessment that had 

appeared to become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine 

Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

Dragon claims it never received the proposed penalty assessment from the Department of 

Labor. The Secretary of Labor does not oppose the request to reopen and concedes that the 

assessment was not delivered to the operator but rather, was returned to MSHA. 

Section 105(a) states that if an operator “fails to notify the Secretary that [the operator] 

intends to contest the . . . proposed assessment of penalty . . . the proposed assessment of penalty 

shall be deemed a final order of the Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 815(a). Here, because the 

operator never had an opportunity to timely contest the proposed assessment, we conclude that 

the proposed penalty assessment did not become a final order of the Commission. This obviates 

any need to invoke Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, the 

operator’s motion to reopen is moot.

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

 MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

 ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) 

v.

DRAGON PRODUCTS COMPANY, LLC

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. YORK 2021-0060

A.C. No. 17-00022-533995

April 17, 2023
2

We deem the operator’s motion a contest of the relevant penalties. Accordingly, 

consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file a petition for assessment of penalty within 45 

days of the date of this order. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

_________________________________

Mary Lu Jordan, Chair

_________________________________ 

William I. Althen, Commissioner 

_________________________________ 

Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr., Commissioner

_________________________________ 

Timothy J. Baker, Commissioner 
3

Distribution:

C. Gregory Ruffennach, Esq.

1629 K Street, N.W., STE 300

Washington, DC 20036

greg@ruffennachlaw.com

April Nelson, Esq.

Associate Solicitor

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

Nelson.April@dol.gov

Emily Toler Scott, Esq.

Counsel for Appellate Litigation

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

scott.emily.t@dol.gov

Melanie Garris 

USDOL/MSHA, OAASEI/CPCO 

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

Garris.Melanie@DOL.GOV

Chief Administrative Law Judge Glynn F. Voisin

Federal Mine Safety Health Review Commission 

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 520N

Washington, DC 20004-1710

GVoisin@fmshrc.gov
DISCIPLINARY CASES

2013-1101.

#### Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Marcheskie.

On August 13, 2013, this court imposed an interim default suspension upon respondent in this matter. On February 27, 2014, this matter was remanded to the board for further proceedings.

In *In re Resignation of Marcheskie,*case No. 2014^1045, this court accepted respondent’s resignation with disciplinary action pending.

Therefore, it is ordered by the court that Supreme Court case No. 2013-1101 is dismissed as moot.
Exhibit 10.47
  Name and Position
    
    Fiscal Year
    
    Base SalaryRobert B. McKnight, Jr.,
    
    
    2010
    
    
    $
    1,000,000Chief Executive Officer and PresidentJoseph Scirocco,
    
    
    2010
    
    
    $
    550,000Chief Financial OfficerCharles S. Exon,
    
    
    2010
    
    
    $
    500,000Chief Administrative Officer, Secretary and General CounselPierre Agnes,
    
    
    2010
    
    
    $
    475,000
    (1)President  Quiksilver EuropeCraig Stevenson,
    
    
    2010
    
    
    $
    475,000President  Quiksilver Americas
 
 (1)
    
    Mr. Agness base salary is paid in euros, but has been translated
into U.S. dollars at an exchange rate of 1.30 dollars per euro
for purposes of this disclosure.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,839
<SECURITIES>                                       740
<RECEIVABLES>                                   67,096
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,577
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         960,720
<DEPRECIATION>                                 183,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 939,332
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        754,931
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,202
<COMMON>                                           135
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,888
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   939,332
<SALES>                                         22,753
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               122,125
<CGS>                                           19,509
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   80,778
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,072
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,528
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,878
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,878
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,878
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02


</TABLE>
----

----

----

|   | (i) | the accompanying annual report on Form 10-K of the Trust for the year ended December 31, 2008, (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date: October 13, 2009 | /s/ Gregory E. Crissman     |   |
|------------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                   | Gregory E. Crissman,        |   |
|                   | Chief Executive Officer and |   |
|                   | Chief Financial Officer     |   |

----
1

GLD-226 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 12-2490

___________

JAMES MURRAY,

 Appellant

v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS;

HARRELL WATTS

____________________________________

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Civil No. 3:12-cv-00771)

District Judge: Honorable Richard P. Conaboy

____________________________________

Submitted for Possible Summary Action 

Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6

July 12, 2012

Before: FUENTES, GREENAWAY, JR. and BARRY, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: July 24, 2012 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

James Murray filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition in the United States 

District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. He claimed that he was being 
2

denied access to legal materials and was not allowed to act in court on his own behalf. 

The District Court dismissed the petition, and we will summarily affirm its 

judgment.

1

 Murray v. Bledsoe, 650 F.3d 246, 248 (3d Cir. 2011) (per curiam); see also

3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6. While habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 

can be used to challenge the “execution” of a federal sentence, Cardona v. Bledsoe, 681 

F.3d 533, 535 (3d Cir. 2012), they cannot be used to attack confinement conditions. 

Rather, such claims should be raised in a civil-rights suit. See Leamer v. Fauver, 288 

F.3d 532, 544 (3d Cir. 2002); see also Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 520, 532 (2002)

(discussing broad definition of “prison conditions”); Brown v. Mills, 639 F.3d 733, 734 

(6th Cir. 2011) (approving the conversion of a § 2241 petition that attacked, inter alia, 

“restricting . . . access to legal materials [and] to the law library” as a civil-rights 

complaint). The District Court therefore correctly dismissed the petition without 

prejudice to Murray’s commencing another action in the proper context.

For the foregoing reasons, the order of the District Court will be affirmed.

Murray’s motion to expedite is denied as moot. 

 

1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and conduct de novo review. Ballentine 

v. United States, 486 F.3d 806, 808 (3d Cir. 2007); Fowler v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 94 

F.3d 835, 837 (3d Cir. 1996).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP96-383-020]

Take notice that on January 30, 2001, Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) tendered for filing tariff sheets disclosing recently negotiated rate transactions. DTI states that the tariff sheets relate to future negotiated rate transactions between DTI and Pool Operators. DTI and the Pool Operators will enter into Service Agreements under DTI's Rate Schedule IT, to become effective February 1, 2001. Under these agreements, DTI has agreed to provide certain interruptible transportation service for the Pool Operators, for delivery at Dominion's Appalachian Aggregation Points.

DTI states that copies of the filing have been served upon DTI's customers and interested state Commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at ­http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-3578  Filed 2-12-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*July 18, 2014*

[Cite as *0711812014 Case Announcements,*2014-Ohio-3157.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2014-0711.

#### State ex rel. Indus. Energy Users-Ohio v. Pub. Util. Comm.

In Mandamus and Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus and prohibition.

Upon consideration of intervening respondent the Dayton Power & Light Company’s motion for leave to intervene, it is ordered by the court that the motion is granted.