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








Exhibit 10.2


FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE PROPERTIES TRUST 2017 OMNIBUS EQUITY AND INCENTIVE PLAN


The Corporate Office Properties Trust 2017 Omnibus Equity and Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended, effective as of November 29, 2018, as set forth below.  All capitalized terms used but not defined in this First Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan.


		
	1.
	Section 4 of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:




SECTION 4.  ELIGIBILITY


Grantees under the Plan will be such full or part-time officers or other employees, Non-Employee Trustees and Consultants of the Company and its Subsidiaries as are
selected from time to time by the Administrator in its sole discretion (the “Eligible Grantees”).  In order to facilitate the grant of Units under the Plan, the Administrator may, in its sole discretion, grant Units indirectly to Eligible Grantees through an intermediate entity.


		
	2.
	Section 13 of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:




SECTION 13.  Other Equity-Based Awards


The Administrator shall have the right to grant Units or any other membership or ownership interests (which may be expressed as units or otherwise) in a Subsidiary (or other affiliate of the Company), with any Shares being issued in connection with the conversion of (or other distribution on account of) an interest granted under the authority of this Section 13 to be subject to Section 3 and the other provisions of the Plan.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, any cash dividends or distributions otherwise payable pursuant to an Award granted pursuant to this Section 13, other than an Award of Units, that remains subject to performance based vesting, or forfeiture based on the failure to meet performance-based conditions (i.e., conditions other than the continued service or employment of the grantee through a certain date), must be retained by, or repaid by the grantee to, the Company or the applicable entity granting the Award; provided that, to the extent provided for in the applicable Award Certificate or by the Administrator, an amount equal to such cash dividends or distributions retained or repaid by the grantee may be paid to the grantee upon the satisfaction or lapsing of such performance-based conditions with respect to such Award. 


		
	3.
	All other terms and conditions of the Plan shall be unchanged and remain in full force and effect.




This First Amendment was duly adopted and approved by the Board of Trustees of Corporate Office Properties Trust on the date first written above.  


    


 







        	
	
	Corporate Office Properties Trust

	 

	/s/ Stephen E. Budorick

	Stephen E. Budorick

	President & Chief Executive Officer
#### § 2530.0-7 Cross reference.

For native allotments in Alaska see subpart 2561 of this chapter.

[35 FR 9589, June 13, 1970]
§ 650.1 Nature and purpose of the standard. ( a ) This standard is responsive to the overriding concern of the U.S. Supreme Court in California Department of Human Resources v. Java, 402 U.S. 121 (1971), and that of other courts with delay in payment of unemployment compensation to eligible individuals, including delays caused specifically by the adjudication process. The standard seeks to assure that all administrative appeals affecting benefit rights are heard and decided with the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible.
( b ) Sections 303(a) (1) and (3) of the Social Security Act require, as a condition for the receipt of granted funds, that State laws include provisions for methods of administration reasonably calculated to insure full payment of unemployment compensation when due, and opportunity for a fair hearing for all individuals whose claims for unemployment compensation are denied. The Secretary has construed these provisions to require, as a condition for receipt of granted funds, that State laws include provisions for hearing and deciding appeals for all unemployment insurance claimants who are parties to an administrative benefit appeal with the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible. What is the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible in an individual case depends on the facts and circumstances of that case. For example, the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible will be longer in cases that involve interstate appeals, complex issues of fact or law, reasonable requests by parties for continuances or rescheduling of hearings or other unforeseen and uncontrollable factors than it will be for other cases.
( c ) In addition, the Secretary has construed section 303(b)(2) of the Social Security Act as requiring States to comply substantially with the required provisions of State law. The Secretary considers as substantial compliance the issuance of minimum percentages of first level benefit appeal decisions within the periods of time specified in § 650.4.
( d ) Although the interpretation of Federal law requirements in § 650.3 below applies to both first and second level administrative benefit appeals, the criteria for review of State compliance in § 650.3(b) apply only to first level benefit appeals.
### §4134. Types of investments

#### (a) In general

Subject to section 4133 of this title and the Indian housing plan for an Indian tribe, the recipient for that tribe shall have—

(1) the discretion to use grant amounts for affordable housing activities through equity investments, interest-bearing loans or advances, noninterest-bearing loans or advances, interest subsidies, leveraging of private investments, or any other form of assistance that the Secretary has determined to be consistent with the purposes of this chapter; and

(2) the right to establish the terms of assistance.

#### (b) Investments

A recipient may invest grant amounts for the purposes of carrying out affordable housing activities in investment securities and other obligations as approved by the Secretary.

(Pub. L. 104–330, title II, §204, Oct. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 4033.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 104–330, Oct. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 4016, known as the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4101 of this title and Tables.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1997, except as otherwise expressly provided, see section 107 of Pub. L. 104–330, set out as a note under section 4101 of this title.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jermaine Lamont RORIE, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 05-7461.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 31, 2006.

Decided: Feb. 24, 2006.

Jermaine Lamont Rorie, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Albert Jamison Lang, Office of the United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

*755PER CURIAM:

Jermaine Lamont Rorie seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rorie has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
### §1616q. Exemption from payment of certain fees

Employees of a tribal health program or urban Indian organization shall be exempt from payment of licensing, registration, and any other fees imposed by a Federal agency to the same extent that officers of the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service and other employees of the Service are exempt from those fees.

(Pub. L. 94–437, title I, §124, as added Pub. L. 111–148, title X, §10221(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 935.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 124 of Pub. L. 94–437 is based on section 113 of title I of S. 1790, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, as reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate in Dec. 2009, which was enacted into law by section 10221(a) of Pub. L. 111–148.
### §147. Appropriations for specified buildings; use for transportation of materials

Appropriations for specified buildings in the Indian Service shall be used for the transportation of materials purchased therefrom.

(Jan. 12, 1927, ch. 27, §1, 44 Stat. 939.)
Table 29
                                   U. S. Department of the Interior - Bureau of Reclamation
                                          Central Valley Operations Office

                                   Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley - Streamflow Data
                                                    2002
Mean monthly flow in cfs

                               Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug    Sep    Oct    Nov     Dec
Sacramento River

Shasta computed inflow        14182   9254   9551   7866   5759   3700   3475   3431   3151   3048   3856   17993
At Keswick                     6960   4148   5292   5526   9346  12756  14603  10909   7690   6959   5677    5611
At Bend Bridge                15587   8270   8142   7098  10050  12824  14353  10963   7851   7360   6737   16523
At Vina Bridge                19635   8871   8917   7130   9294  11741  13463   9839   6811   6525   6335   21501
At Ord Ferry                  22050   7441   7746   3278   5637   7332   9060   6094   3727   2710   2696   20101
At Colusa                     20772  10171  10148   6353   7493   8520   9828   8125   6555   5220   5386   16653
Below Wilkins Slough          18180  10576  10620   6094   6679   7268   8691   7568   6802   5402   5752   14726
At Verona                     34138  14345  15958   9478   9145  10217  14700  14141  10928   7380   8925   24707
Sacramento at "I" Street      36687  15849  18823  13036  11394  12326  17439  15661  12209   8828  10481   26102


Miscellaneous Stations

Folsom computed inflow         3901   3822   4936   4573   3998   2217   1245   1297   1295    958   1609    3304
American R at Nimbus Dam       1460   1503   2897   3640   2607   2665   3306   1944   1502   1508   1571    1672
Kings River at Pine Flat         95    602   1017   1618   3176   6039   5660   2036    268    148    106      91


San Joaquin River

At Friant Dam                    93     95    124    159    176    189    231    208    208    175    124     110
Near Vernalis                  2920   2191   2411   2823   3032   1753   1597   1461   1468   1902   1975    2242


Putah Creek

Berryessa computed inflow      1874    358    348     99     37      0      0      0     17      0     68    3819
Putah Creek - Lake Solano        45     16     34     47     43     43     43     34     20     20     40     155


Stanislaus River

New Melones computed inflow    1062    779   1440   1804   1639    935    783    743    725    699    629    1111
At Tulloch Dam                  319    499    902   2184   2251   1965   2077   1804   1415    624    316     275
At Orange Blossom               247    319    338    712    602    317    329    185    164    224    200     203

*  Data supplied by Central Valley Operations Coordinations Office
    Daily mean is derived from 7 am daily reading.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 2,330.14

 2,330.51

 2,330.85

 2,331.19

 2,331.47

 2,331.70

 2,331.93

 2,332.20

 2,332.46

 2,332.74

 2,333.02

 2,333.29

 2,333.57

 2,333.85

 2,334.10

 2,334.32

 2,334.54

 2,334.78

 2,335.05

 2,335.32

 2,335.59

 2,335.87

 2,336.18

 2,336.56

 2,336.95

 2,337.34

 2,337.73

 2,338.16

 2,338.52

 2,338.79

 1,847.5

 1,852.6

 1,857.3

 1,861.9

 1,865.8

 1,869.0

 1,872.2

 1,875.9

 1,879.5

 1,883.4

 1,887.3

 1,891.1

 1,895.0

 1,898.9

 1,902.4

 1,905.5

 1,908.6

 1,912.0

 1,915.8

 1,919.6

 1,923.4

 1,927.3

 1,931.7

 1,937.1

 1,942.7

 1,948.2

 1,953.8

 1,959.9

 1,965.1

 1,969.0

STORAGE

+5.6

+5.1

+4.7

+4.7

+3.9

+3.2

+3.2

+3.7

+3.6

+3.9

+3.9

+3.8

+3.9

+3.9

+3.5

+3.1

+3.1

+3.4

+3.8

+3.8

+3.8

+4.0

+4.4

+5.4

+5.5

+5.6

+5.6

+6.1

+5.2

+3.9

CHANGE

3,151

2,872

2,742

2,945

3,443

2,637

2,109

3,112

3,030

2,220

2,784

2,333

2,419

2,285

3,375

2,428

1,921

2,210

2,255

2,370

2,373

2,456

3,097

3,348

3,404

3,643

3,406

4,014

6,746

4,984

INFLOW

 274

 270

 336

 576

 1,454

 997

 429

 1,149

 1,208

 217

 769

 378

 398

 284

 1,552

 849

 305

 469

 262

 373

 393

 376

 821

 587

 580

 764

 520

 852

 4,092

 2,977

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 44

 36

 49

 4

 37

 37

 77

 73

 0

 41

 53

 53

 49

 29

 58

 21

 58

 41

 79

 75

 58

 87

 63

 42

 33

 75

 80

 63

 51

 55

C.F.S.

 .11

 .09

 .12

 .01

 .09

 .09

 .19

 .18

 .00

 .10

 .13

 .13

 .12

 .07

 .14

 .05

 .14

 .10

 .19

 .18

 .14

 .21

 .15

 .10

 .08

 .18

 .19

 .15

 .12

 .13

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .32

 .01

 .00

 .22

 .66

 .33

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .02

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .44

 .08

 .15

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .02

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2005 TRINITY LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: October 26, 2005

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +127.3 90,112 24,511 0 0 1,521 3.68 2.32

ACRE-FEET +127,300 178,737 48,618 0 0 3,017

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 48,618

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 48,618

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 2.32

JULY 1, 2004 27.71

 1,841.9

Table 4

(1) (1)
EXHIBIT11 — COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE                   Nine Months Ended  Three Months Ended   September 30,  September 30, *(In thousands, except per share data)* 2006  2005  2006  2005 Basic Numerator:                Income before discontinued operations $480,173  $452,183  $185,871  $171,830 Income (loss) from discontinued operations,net  —   21,906   —   33,645              Net income  480,173   474,089   185,871   205,475 Diluted Numerator:                                 Effect of dilutive securities — none  —   —   —   —              Numerator for income before discontinuedoperations — diluted $480,173  $452,183  $185,871  $171,830 Numerator for discontinued operations, net —diluted  —   21,906   —   33,645              Net income — diluted  480,173   474,089   185,871   205,475 Denominator:                                 Weighted average common shares — basic  503,903   548,464   492,714   542,152                  Effect of dilutive securities:                Stock options and restricted stock  823   1,312   864   1,323              Denominator for net income per common share —diluted  504,726   549,776   493,578   543,475                  Net income (loss) per common share:                Income before discontinued operations — basic $.95  $.82  $.38  $.32 Loss from discontinued operations, net — basic  —   .04   —   .06              Basic $.95  $.86  $.38  $.38                               Income before discontinued operations —diluted $.95  $.82  $.38  $.32 Loss from discontinued operations, net —diluted  —   .04   —   .06              Diluted $.95  $.86  $.38  $.38
#### Charles M. WARD, Movant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

April 30, 1943.

E. S. Howard for movant.

• Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and W. Owen Keller, Assistant Attorney General, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied; judgment affirmed.
### §467c. Federal court jurisdiction of enforcement and injunction proceedings and other kinds of cases; limitations; United States as plaintiff; subpenas

The United States district courts, the District Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, the highest court of American Samoa, and the United States courts of the other territories, are vested with jurisdiction specifically to enforce, and to prevent and restrain violations of, this chapter, and shall have jurisdiction in all other kinds of cases arising under this chapter, except as provided in section 457(d) or 467 of this title. All proceedings for the enforcement or to restrain violations of this chapter shall be by and in the name of the United States. Subpenas for witnesses who are required to attend a court of the United States, in any district, may run into any other district in any such proceeding.

(Pub. L. 85–172, §21, as added Pub. L. 90–492, §17, Aug. 18, 1968, 82 Stat. 806.)
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T SA M U EL D . BA TES, P e titio n e r- A p p e llan t, v. C OMMI S S I ON E R OF I NT E RNA L RE VENU E, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 74807 T a x C t . N o. 4010- 06 ME MOR AN DU M *

A ppe a l f r om aD e c i s i on of

the U ni t ed S t at es T ax C ou rt S ubm i tt e d M ay24, 2011 ** B efo re: P R E G E R S O N , T H O M A S , an dP A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. S a m ue l D . B a t e s appe a l s pr o s e f r om the T a x C ourt ’ s de c i s i on uphol di ng the C om m i s s i one rof

I nt e rna l R e ve nue ’ s de t e rm i na t i on of i nc om e t a x de f

i c i e nc i e s f

or years 2 0 0 1 an d2 0 0 2 , an di m p o si t i o n o f a p en al ty u n d er 2 6 U . S . C . § 6 6 6 2 . H e al so ap p e a ls f r o m th e T a x C o u rt’s im p o s itio n o f s an c tio n s u n d e r2 6 U .S .C . § 6 6 7 3 . W e



# FI LED JU N 07 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 74807 2 h av e ju risd icti o n u n d er2 6 U .S .C . § 7 4 8 2 (a ). W e r ev iew d e n o v o th e T ax C o u rt’s le g a l c o n c lu s io n s a n df

o rc le are rr o rits f

a c tu a l f in d in g s . Se e C o m m ’ rv . D u n kin , 5 0 0 F. 3 d1 0 6 5 , 1 0 6 8 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 7 ) . W e a f f i rm. B a te s ’s c o n te n tio n th a t h e w a s n o t s ub je c t to f e d e r a l in c o m e ta x e s is f r iv o lo u s . Se e U

n ite d Sta tes v . N

e ls o n ( I n r e B e c ra

ft) , 88 5 F . 2d 54 7, 54 8 (9th C i r. 19 89 ) ( order) ; T re as . R eg. § 1 . 1-1. B at es do es no totherw i se chal l enge the T ax C ou rt ’ s det erm i nat i on of i ncom e t ax defi ci enci es , and thu s has abando ned any such c h a lle n g e . See C o o k v. Sch ri ro , 53 8 F . 3d 10 00 , 10 14 n. 5 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( i ss ues no t ra i se d o n app ea l ar e dee m ed abando ned). T he T a x C ourtdi d notc l e a r l ye rrbyf i ndi ng thatB a t e s w a s s ubj e c tt o the a c c u r a c y - r e la te dp e n a ltyf o rn e g lig e n c e u n d e r2 6 U .S .C . § 6 6 6 2 ( b ) . Se e Sparkm an v. C om m ’r , 50 9 F . 3d 11 49 , 11 61 (9th C i r. 20 07 ). T he T a x C ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on byi m pos i ng s anc t i ons unde r26 U .S .C . § 6 6 7 3 f

o rB a te s ’s f

r iv o lo u s a ru g m e n ts . See W ol f v. C om m ’r , 4 F . 3d 709, 71 6 (9th C i r. 19 93 ) ( st andard of revi ew ). AF F I RME D.
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4605 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 19, 2016 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 615 6th Avenue SE in Cedar Rapids, Iowa 

as the ‘‘Sgt. 1st Class Terryl L. Pasker Post Office 

Building’’. 

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


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4605 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SGT. 1ST CLASS TERRYL L. PASKER POST OF2 FICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 615 6th Avenue SE in Cedar 

5 Rapids, Iowa, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sgt. 

6 1st Class Terryl L. Pasker Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sgt. 1st Class Terryl 

11 L. Pasker Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 18, 2016. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of CEO Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Roger Stone, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:



|Date: March 18, 2008 |  |        |                                     
|-------------------- |  | ------ | ------------------------------------
|                     |  | By:    | /s/ROGER STONE                      
|                     |  | Name:  | Roger Stone                         
|                     |  | Title: | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks