alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                         EXHIBIT 10.28

                                AMENDMENT 1996-1

                            HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION
                      EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN



     WHEREAS, Hilton Hotels Corporation (the "Company") maintains the Hilton 
Hotels Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the "Plan"); and

     WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan, effective January 1, 
1997, as set forth herein; and

     WHEREAS, Company has the ability to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 
10.4 thereof;

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective January 1, 1997, 
as follows:

          1.  The definition of Eligible Employee contained in Section 1.2
     is amended to read as follows:

               "'Eligible Employee' shall mean (i) an officer of Hilton Hotels
          Corporation at the Vice President level or higher, (ii) a hotel
          general manager who is employed by the Company, or (iii) a member of a
          select group of management or highly compensated employees of the
          Company who is selected by the Committee (or its delegate) to
          participate in the Plan pursuant to Section 2.1."

           2.  Section 1.2 is amended by deleting the definition of "Highly
     Compensated Employee" therein.

<PAGE>

           3.  The first sentence of Section 2.1 is amended to read as
     follows:

               "Prior to December 31 of each year, the Committee (or its
          delegate) shall designate which members of a select group of
          management or highly compensated employees of the Company shall become
          Eligible Employees for the following Plan Year."

           4.  Paragraph (8) of Section 9.3(a) is amended to read as
     follows:

               "To select those members of a select group of management or
          highly compensated employees who shall be Eligible Employees."


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this document to be executed 
by its duly authorized officer on this _____ day of December, 1996.

                                             
                              HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION


                              By: ______________________


                              Its: _____________________



                                       2
### §2112. Repealed. Pub. L. 113–79, title VIII, §8003, Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 913

Section, Pub. L. 95–313, §18, formerly §15, as added Pub. L. 100–418, title IV, §4403, Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1400; renumbered §18, Pub. L. 101–624, title XII, §1215(1), Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3525, related to the establishment of a cooperative national forest products marketing program.
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 189 

Condemning all forms of antisemitism. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 2, 2019 

Mr. CRUZ (for himself, Mr. KAINE, Mr. CRAMER, Ms. ROSEN, Mr. YOUNG, 

Mr. COONS, Mr. RUBIO, Ms. CORTEZ MASTO, Mr. COTTON, Mrs. SHAHEEN, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. HAWLEY, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, 

Mr. BRAUN, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. RISCH, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. ISAKSON, 

Mr. BLUNT, Mr. ROMNEY, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. MORAN, Ms. COLLINS, 

Mr. ROUNDS, Mr. WICKER, Mrs. FISCHER, Ms. ERNST, Mr. ROBERTS, 

Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. DAINES, Ms. MCSALLY, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. TOOMEY, 

Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. PERDUE, Mr. SULLIVAN, and Mr. 

LANKFORD) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Condemning all forms of antisemitism. 

Whereas antisemitism is a unique form of prejudice stretching back millennia that attacks the equal humanity of the 

Jewish people; 

Whereas antisemitism has long perpetrated myths about 

Jews, including the Russian fabrication of the Protocols 

of the Elders of Zion and the wide circulation of libelous 

falsehoods about the Jewish murder of infants; 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 189 IS 

Whereas, in its most extreme form, antisemitism aims at the 

physical destruction of the Jewish people, as seen in pogroms, forced conversions and Nazi Germany’s murder of 

over six million Jews; 

Whereas antisemitism has included attacks on the livelihood 

of Jews including prohibitions on land ownership, campaigns to boycott, confiscate or destroy Jewish businesses, and denial of the ability of Jews to practice certain professions; 

Whereas, in the United States, Jews have suffered from systematic discrimination in the form of exclusion from 

home ownership in certain neighborhoods, prohibition 

from staying in certain hotels, restrictions upon membership in private clubs and other associations, limitations 

upon admission to certain educational institutions and 

other barriers to equal justice under the law; 

Whereas, in the United States, Jews have faced, and continue 

to face, false accusations of divided loyalty between the 

United States and Israel, false claims that they purchase 

political power with money, and false accusations about 

control of the financial system, along with other negative 

stereotypes; and 

Whereas Jews are the targets of the majority of hate crimes 

committed in the United States against any religious 

group, including attacks on houses of worship and Jewish 

community centers: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the United States Senate condemns 

2 and commits to combatting all forms of antisemitism. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
----- F o r

w ar d e d b y Br i a n Sh ra g

e r / R T P/ U S E P A / U S o n 02 / 18 / 2011 0 3:1 4 P M

---- - F r o m : " Hig

g i n s , C o r t n ey " < C

o r t n ey_ H i g

g i n s @ o m b

. e o p .g

o v> T o : R o b e r t J Wa y l a nd / R

T P / U S E P A / U S@ E P A , T h o m as G illi s / D C / U S E P A / U S@ E P A , R o b i n D un k i n s

/ R T P / U S E P A / U S@ E P A , N i c k Hil o sk y/ D C / U S E P A / U S@ E P A , Br i a n Sh ra g

e r / R T P / U S E P A / U S@ E P A , J i m E dd i n g e r / R T P / U S E P A / U S@ E P A D a t e : 02 / 01 / 201 1 08 : 57 A M Sub j e ct : F W : E

. O

. 12

8 66 M ee t i n g o n B o il e r

M A C T a nd W I S

W I R u l e s
Hi a l l , C o n s i s t e n t w i t h o u r e x e c u t i v e o r d e r , a t t a c h e d ar e t h e h a nd o u t

s fr o m t h e EO 1 286 6 m ee t i n g ye s

t e r d a y
. P l e as e l e t m e k n o

w i f y o u h a v e a n y qu e s t i o n s
. R e g ar d s , C o r t n ey

----- O r i g i n a l A pp o i n t m e n t ----- F r o m : Ec h o l s , M a b e l E

. S e n t: T u e s d a y , J a nu ar

y 25 , 20 1 1 3 : 03 P M T o : E c h o l s , M a b e l E

. ; N ey l a nd , K

e v i n F

. ; M a n c

i n i , Do m i n i c J. ; Hi g

g i n s , C o r t n ey ; L ee , A m a nd a I. ; M a c

N e il , J o hn S

. ; Ra c k o ff , J o n a t h a n

E

. ; t s i r i g o t i s
. p e t e r @ e p a m a i l

. e p a
. g

o v; w a y l a n d

. r o b e r t j @ e p a m a i l

. e p a
. g

o v; g i l li s
. t h o m as @ e p a
. g o v; D un k i n s

. R o b i n @ e p a m a il

. e p a
. g

o v; Hil o s k y
. N i c k @ e p a m a i l

. e p a .g

o v; K e o h a n e , N a t h a n i e l ; L

e v i n s o n , A r i k ; P

a t e l , M a n i s h a ; U t e c h , D a n G

. Sub j e ct : E

. O

. 128

6 6 M ee t i n g o n B

o il e r M A C T a nd W I S

W I R u l e s W h e n : M o nd a y , J a nu ar

y 3 1 , 201 1 11 : 00 A M

- 1 1 :30 A M ( U T C

- 05:00 ) E as t e r n T i m e ( U S & C a n a d a)

. W h e r e : 1010 3 N EO B W h e n : M o nd a y , J a nu ar

y 3 1 , 201 1 11 : 00 A M

- 1 1 :30 A M ( U T C

- 05:00 ) E as t e r n T i m e ( U S & C a n a d a)

. W h e r e : 1010 3 N EO B N o t e : T h e G M T o ffs

e t a b o v e d o e s n o t r

e f l e ct d a y li g h t sav i n g

t i m e a d j u s t m e n t s
. *~*~*~* ~ *~*~* ~ *~*~ * Su sa n B o d i n e , Bar n e s

& T h o r nbu r

g h as r e qu e s t e d t h i s m ee t i n g o n b e h a l f o f T h e U s e d O il M a n a g

e m e n t A ss

o c i a t i o n
. ( S ee a tt a c h e d f il e : J a n 31

_ 2011

_ NH S

W

_ H a nd o u t 1

. pd f) ( S ee a tt a c h e d f il e : J a n 31

_ 2011

_ NH S

W

_ H a nd o u t 2

. pd f) ( S ee a tt a c h e d f il e : J a n 31

_ 2011

_ NH S

W

_ H a nd o u t 3

. pd f) ( S ee a tt a c h e d f il e : J a n 31

_ 2011

_ NH S

W

_ H a nd o u t 4

. pd f) ( S ee a tt a c h e d f il e : J a n 31

_ 2011

_ NH S

W

_ H a nd o u t 5

. pd f)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALEJANDRO PEREZ CASTILLO, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 19-71728 

Agency No. A200-156-356 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 16, 2021**

Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges.

Alejandro Perez Castillo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review 

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal 

and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) and denying his motion 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 22 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-71728 

to terminate proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review 

for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 

F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

In his opening brief, Perez Castillo does not raise any challenge to the 

agency’s determination that he did not suffer past persecution in Mexico. See 

Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not 

specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived). Substantial 

evidence supports the agency’s determination that Perez Castillo failed to establish 

the harm he fears in Mexico would be on account of a protected ground. See

Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be 

free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang 

members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Perez Castillo’s 

withholding of removal claim fails.

In his opening brief, Perez Castillo also does not raise any challenge to the 

agency’s denial of CAT relief or the denial of his motion to terminate. See LopezVasquez, 706 F.3d at 1079-80.

As stated in the court’s September 9, 2019 order, the temporary stay of 

removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 0**  **8 -**  **2305**

RICHARD NGUTI ADE , P etitioner ,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. , Attorney General , Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : April 16, 2010 Decided: May 5 , 2010

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Kell Enow, ENOW & ASSOCIATES IMMIGRATION PRACTICE, Marietta, Georg ia , for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Ernesto H. Molina , Jr., Assistant Director, Jeff e r y R. Leist , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent

. Unpublished opinions are no t binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Richard Nguti Ade , a native and citizen of Cameroon , petition s for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Ade first challenges the determination that he failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibili ty for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias

- Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483

- 84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Ade fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. We therefore find that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief. Additionally, we uphold the denial of Ade’s request for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for withholding of re moval is higher than for asylum

-- even though the facts t hat must be proved are the same

-- an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft , 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because Ade failed to show3 that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal. Finally, we find that substantial evidence supports the finding that Ade f ailed to meet the standard for relief under the Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, an applicant must establish that “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 12 08.16(c)(2) (2009). We find that Ade failed to make the requisite showing before the immigration

court. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in t he materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.19

                                AMENDMENT TO THE
                           QUANEX CORPORATION EMPLOYEE
                     STOCK OPTION AND RESTRICTED STOCK PLAN


         THIS AGREEMENT by Quanex Corporation (the "Company"),

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company previously adopted the
plan agreement known as the "Quanex Corporation Employee Stock Option and
Restricted Stock Plan" (the "Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company retained the right to
amend the Plan from time to time; and

         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has approved the
following amendment to the Plan;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Company agrees that
paragraph G of Section 7 of the Plan is completely amended to provide as
follows:

                  G. TRANSFERABILITY OF OPTIONS. Except as expressly provided
         otherwise in an Optionee's Agreement with respect to a Non-Incentive
         Stock Option, an Option shall not be transferable by the Optionee
         otherwise than by will or under the laws of descent and distribution,
         and shall be exercisable, during the Optionee's lifetime, only by him.
#### Isaac Goldowitz, Plaintiff, v. Robert Gair Company, Defendant.

Motion denied, without costs. Present—Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Putnam, JJ.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) /Joint Staff (JS) Privacy Office received one comment on a new Privacy Act System of Records Notice (SORN) (docket D O D

- 2014

- OS

0160) in which the commenter conveyed concerns related to academic students attending a University Hospital/Research/Academic center and whether the student’s or employee’s medical background records could be comingled or shared with human resources.

The comment does not pertain to this SORN. The published SORN applies solely to students attending Defense Acquisition University courses (not a university hospital/research/academic centers) and does not collect or use any medical records (which would also be covered by HIPAA) or health information.
#### § 669.13 Effect of failure to certify or to adequately obtain proof-of-payment.

If a State fails to certify as required by this regulation or if the Secretary of Transportation determines that a State is not adequately obtaining proof-of-payment of the heavy vehicle use tax as a condition of registration notwithstanding the State's certification, Federal-aid highway funds apportioned to the State under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1) for the next fiscal year shall be reduced in an amount up to 8 percent as determined by the Secretary.

[81 FR 32230, May 23, 2016]
### §284. Establishment; statement of purposes; description; acquisition of property; acreage limitation

For the purpose of establishing in the National Capital area a park for the performing arts and related educational programs, and for recreation use in connection therewith, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to establish, develop, improve, operate, and maintain the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts in Fairfax County, Virginia. The park shall encompass the portions of the property formerly known as Wolf Trap Farm and Symphony Hill in Fairfax County, Virginia, to be donated for park purposes to the United States, and such additional lands or interests therein as the Secretary may acquire for purposes of the park by donation or purchase with donated or appropriated funds, the aggregate of which shall not exceed one hundred and forty-five acres.

(Pub. L. 89–671, §1, Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 950; Pub. L. 107–219, §1(a)(1), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1330.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Pub. L. 107–219 substituted "Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts" for "Wolf Trap Farm Park".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title

Section 12 of Pub. L. 89–671, as added by Pub. L. 97–310, Oct. 14, 1982, 96 Stat. 1458, and amended by Pub. L. 107–219, §1(a)(1), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1330, provided that: "This Act [enacting this subchapter] may be referred to as the 'Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts Act'."

#### Study of Park Future; Report to Congress

Pub. L. 89–671, §13, as added by Pub. L. 101–636, §3, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4587, directed Secretary, acting jointly with the Foundation, to conduct a study and analysis of the operations and management practices being used to carry out the purposes of this subchapter and to submit, not later than 2 years after Nov. 28, 1990, a report of such study and analysis to Congress.
FROM: THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, COUNTY OF RICHLAND,

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. PAUL D. KORDONOWY, Defendant.

No. DC-89-003 DECISION

DATED this 3rd day of August, 1990.

On August 29, 1989, the Defendant was sentenced to twenty (20) years for Count IV, Sexual Intercourse Without Consent; forty (40) years on Count V, Robbery; ten (10) years on Count VII, Aggravated Kidnapping; said sentences are to run consecutively with 220 days credit for time served; Non-Dangerous Designation.

On August 3, 1990, the Defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The Defendant was present and was represented by Peter O. Maltese, Attorney at Law from Sidney, Montana. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the Defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also to increase it if such is possible. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be modified to change the sentences on Counts IV, V, and VII to run concurrent to each other instead of consecutive. The non-dangerous designation shall be changed to Dangerous. All other portions of the sentence shall remain the same as originally imposed.

The reasons for running the sentences concurrent instead of consecutive are: (1) to achieve uniformity in sentencing and (2) the fact that the offenses arose out of the same circumstances on the same evening.

The reasons for the Dangerous designation status are: (1) because of the commission of another felony, Aggravated Assault, within five (5) years and (2) the board also considered the serious nature of this crime.
Exhibit 32

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


         In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of A Better  Way  Financial
Corp.,  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ending  June 30,  2002 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned, B. Stephen Bailey, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

         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.


Date: April 19, 2004

/s/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0378

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

CYLE RAMSEY MADGWICK,

Defendant and Appellant

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 5, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and 

serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 29 2024

05/29/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0378