alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DESCRIPTION OF 2005  CASH BONUS PLAN



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 QUICKSILVER RESOURCES INC. 
  
 Description of 2005 Cash Bonus Plan for Executive Officers 
  

On January 26, 2006, the Compensation Committee of Quicksilver Resources awarded cash bonuses to Quicksilver’s named executive officers and
other executive officers. In determining the amounts of such bonuses, the Committee established for each executive officer target and maximum bonus opportunities (expressed as specified percentages of such executive officer’s base salary, with
target opportunities ranging from 30% to 100% and maximum opportunities from 90% to 120%) and weighted performance measures (including personnel objectives for such executive and two of the following: earnings per share, cash flow from operations,
proven reserves growth and production growth rate). The objective of the bonuses, which will be paid in cash during the first quarter of 2006, is to recognize and reward executives based upon their performance and the performance of Quicksilver in
2005.
#### § 134.8 Official authorized to take final action under the Act.

The Department of State official who renders the final agency decision in a covered proceeding is authorized to take final action on matters pertaining to the Equal Access to Justice Act as applied to the proceeding.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carlos Vega, Appellant.

Motion for leave to prosecute appeal as a poor person granted. The appeal may be perfected upon one typewritten copy of the record and five typewritten copies of the brief. Motion for assignment of counsel denied. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
Exhibit 99.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. HANNIGAN

On this day, Sabre Holdings Corporation (the "Company") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2003 (the "Report").

This
written statement accompanied the Report.

I,
William J. Hannigan, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that:



A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.

|/s/ William J. HanniganWilliam J. Hannigan
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2003 |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---

QuickLinks
§ 224.31 Determining the amount of penalties and assessments. ( a ) In determining an appropriate amount of civil penalties and assessments, the ALJ and the A.I.D. Administrator, upon appeal, should evaluate any circumstances that mitigate or aggravate the violation and should articulate in their opinions the reasons that support the penalties and assessments they impose. Because of the intangible costs of fraud, the expense of investigating such conduct, and the need to deter others who might be similarly tempted, ordinarily double damages and a significant civil penalty should be imposed.
( b ) Although not exhaustive, the following factors are among those that may influence the ALJ and the A.I.D. Administrator in determining the amount of penalties and assessments to impose with respect to the misconduct (*i.e.*, the false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or statements) charged in the complaint: ( 1 ) The number of false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or statements;
( 2 ) The time period over which such claims or statements were made;
( 3 ) The degree of the defendant's culpability with respect to the misconduct;
( 4 ) The amount of money or the value of the property, services, or benefit falsely claimed;
( 5 ) The value of the Government's actual loss as a result of the misconduct, including foreseeable consequential damages and the costs of investigation;
( 6 ) The relationship of the amount imposed as civil penalties to the amount of the Government's loss;
( 7 ) The potential or actual impact of the misconduct upon national defense, public health or safety, or public confidence in the management of Government programs and operations, including particularly the impact on the intended beneficiaries of such programs;
( 8 ) Whether the defendant has engaged in a pattern of the same or similar misconduct;
( 9 ) Whether the defendant attempted to conceal the misconduct;
( 10 ) The degree to which the defendant has involved others in the misconduct or in concealing it;
( 11 ) Where the misconduct of employees or agents is imputed to the defendant, the extent to which the defendant's practices fostered or attempted to preclude such misconduct;
( 12 ) Whether the defendant cooperated in or obstructed an investigation of the misconduct;
( 13 ) Whether the defendant assisted in identifying and prosecuting other wrongdoers;
( 14 ) The complexity of the program or transaction, and the degree of the defendant's sophistication with respect to it, including the extent of defendant's prior participation in the program or in similar transactions;
( 15 ) Whether the defendant has been found, in any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, to have engaged in similar misconduct or to have dealt dishonestly with the Government of the United States or of a State, directly or indirectly; and
( 16 ) The need to deter the defendant and others from engaging in the same or similar misconduct.
( c ) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the ALJ or the A.I.D. Administrator from considering any other factors that in any given case may mitigate or aggravate the offense for which penalties and assessments are imposed.
<PAGE>

                                  COMMUNITYCORP

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

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

The undersigned herby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

This 12th day of May, 2003

/s/ W. ROGER CROOK
-------------------------------------
W. Roger Crook
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ GWEN P. BUNTON
--------------------------
Gwen P. Bunton
Vice President and Cashier

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Communitycorp and will be retained by Communitycorp and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE****SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Darryl K. Horne, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Spectrum Sciences & Software HoldingsCorp.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the issuer and have: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the issuer’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.5. The issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and theaudit committee of issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.By: /s/DARRYL K. HORNE
Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 1 of 6
Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 2 of 6
Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 3 of 6
Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 4 of 6
Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 5 of 6
June 2

June 6

August 9, 2010

Case 3:08-cv-01105-MEJ Document 28 Filed 08/09/10 Page 6 of 6
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 1413 V

Filed: September 30, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

MARGARET SCHWARCK

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (SIRVA)

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC , for

petitioner.

Jeffrey T. Sprague , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On September 17, 2018

, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccin e

administration ( “S IRVA ” ) as a result of an influenza ( “f lu ”) vaccine administered on October 10, 2017 . Petit ion at 1 . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit

of the Office of Special Masters.

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine
Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the
disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned

agrees that the iden tified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from
public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this
case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in

accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management
and Promotion of Electronic Government Services).

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 10 0 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012 ).2

On September 27, 2019

, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent concludes that petitioner ’ s alleged injury is

consistent with a SIRVA as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table. Id. at 7 . Respondent further agrees that petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than

six months. Id.

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the undersigned find s that petitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
§ 37.100 Core Principle 1—Compliance with core principles. ( a ) *In general.* To be registered, and maintain registration, as a swap execution facility, the swap execution facility shall comply with— ( 1 ) The core principles described in section 5h of the Act; and
( 2 ) Any requirement that the Commission may impose by rule or regulation pursuant to section 8a(5) of the Act.
( b ) *Reasonable discretion of a swap execution facility.* Unless otherwise determined by the Commission by rule or regulation, a swap execution facility described in paragraph (a) of this section shall have reasonable discretion in establishing the manner in which the swap execution facility complies with the core principles described in section 5h of the Act.
§ 1501.3 Description of central organization and location of offices. ( a ) The management of ADF is vested in a Board of Directors (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) consisting of a Chairperson, a Vice Chairperson and five other members appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Five of the members are appointed from private life and two from among the officers and employees of agencies of the United States concerned with African affairs. The Board establishes policy for the Foundation and is responsible for its management.
( b ) The Board is required to appoint a President of the Foundation upon such terms as it may determine. The President has responsibility for directing the day to day activities of the Foundation. He is assisted by a Vice President, a Congressional liaison officer, a Public Affairs officer, a General Counsel, and the following staff units: ( 1 ) *Office of Administration and Finance.* This office is responsible for the management of the administrative, budgeting, financial and personnel activities of the Foundation.
( 2 ) *Office of Research and Evaluation.* This office is responsible for evaluating, or assisting grantees to evaluate, ADF funded projects; for monitoring evaluations and analyses of grassroots projects conducted by other funding or research organizations; and for identifying and providing assistance to indigenous researchers in Africa working in development projects at the local level.
( 3 ) *Office of Program and Field Operations.* This office is responsible for identifying, reviewing and monitoring projects funded by the Foundation.
( c ) The Board is also required to establish an Advisory Council made up of individuals knowledgeable about development activities in Africa, and to consult with the Council at least once each year. The Council shall have not more than 25 members appointed for a period of two years with an option to be reappointed for an additional year.
( d ) The Board of Directors and the aforementioned officers, together with the other employees of the Foundation, constitute the central organization of ADF, and are located and function at ADF headquarters, 1724 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20036. It is anticipated that in the future a field organization will be established with offices in selected cities in Africa, but this has not yet occurred.
### §1857f–6d. Repealed. Pub. L. 91–604, §8(a), Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1694

Section, act July 14, 1955, ch. 360, title II, §211, as added Nov. 21, 1967, Pub. L. 90–148, §2, 81 Stat. 503, provided for a national emissions standards study for stationary sources to be conducted by the Secretary, with a report and recommendations to be submitted to the Congress by Nov. 21, 1969, and for a study of the feasibility of controls for jet and piston aircraft engines, with a report thereon to Congress by Nov. 21, 1968.
### §289c. Research on public health emergencies

If the Secretary determines, after consultation with the Director of NIH, the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, or the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, that a disease or disorder constitutes a public health emergency, the Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH—

(1) shall expedite the review by advisory councils under section 284a of this title and by peer review groups under section 289a of this title of applications for grants for research on such disease or disorder or proposals for contracts for such research;

(2) shall exercise the authority in section 6101 of title 41 respecting public exigencies to waive the advertising requirements of such section in the case of proposals for contracts for such research;

(3) may provide administrative supplemental increases in existing grants and contracts to support new research relevant to such disease or disorder; and

(4) shall disseminate, to health professionals and the public, information on the cause, prevention, and treatment of such disease or disorder that has been developed in research assisted under this section.

The amount of an increase in a grant or contract provided under paragraph (3) may not exceed one-half the original amount of the grant or contract.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §494, as added Pub. L. 99–158, §2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 875; amended Pub. L. 102–531, title III, §312(d)(9), Oct. 27, 1992, 106 Stat. 3504; Pub. L. 109–482, title I, §104(b)(1)(P), Jan. 15, 2007, 120 Stat. 3693.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

In par. (2), "section 6101 of title 41" substituted for "section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 5)" on authority of Pub. L. 111–350, §6(c), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3854, which Act enacted Title 41, Public Contracts.

#### Amendments

2007—Pub. L. 109–482 struck out subsec. (a) designation before "If the Secretary" and subsec. (b) which read as follows: "Not later than 90 days after the end of a fiscal year, the Secretary shall report to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate on actions taken under subsection (a) of this section in such fiscal year."

1992—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 102–531 substituted "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" for "Centers for Disease Control".

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

#### Effective Date of 2007 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–482 applicable only with respect to amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2007 or subsequent fiscal years, see section 109 of Pub. L. 109–482, set out as a note under section 281 of this title.
Personnel Security Inves

for Industry and the Na

Industrial Security Pro
This page intentionally left blank.









This page intentionally left blank.
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 Quarterly Report of Internet Infinity, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, George P. Morris, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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; and





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





Date:  February 12, 2011


/s/ George MorrisGeorge MorrisChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Internet Infinity, Inc. and will be retained by Internet Infinity, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Janice Bloch, Appellant, v Travelers Insurance Co., Respondent.

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on July 16, 1976, unanimously affirmed on the opinion of Fraiman, J., at Special Term, without costs and without disbursements. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano and Lane, JJ.
Exhibit 10.20



 






EXHIBIT 10.20




SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE

ARGO-TECH CORPORATION

EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN

EXCESS BENEFITS PLAN




As Amended and Restated

Effective November 1, 2001




     WHEREAS, Argo-Tech Corporation has established the Argo-Tech Corporation Employee Stock
Ownership Plan Excess Benefit Plan (the “Plan”), effective as of May 17, 1994; and



     WHEREAS, Argo-Tech Corporation, with the consent of each Participant (as such term is defined
in the Plan), deems it desirable to amend and terminate the Plan in accordance with Section 5.01 of
the Plan.



     NOW, THEREFORE, effective as set forth below, the Plan is here amended.



     (1) Section 2.01 is amended by adding the following definitions:




(h) “Merger Agreement” means the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated
as of September 13, 2005, by and among A. T. Holdings’ Corporation,
Argo-Tech Corporation, the GreatBanc Trust Company as Trustee of the
Argo-Tech Corporation Employee Stock Ownership Plan, V.G.A.T.
Investors, LLC, and Vaughn Merger Sub, Inc., wholly-owned subsidiary
of V.G.A.T. Investors, LLC.




(i) “Merger Effective Date” means the effective date of the merger
provided for in the Merger Agreement.




(j) “Per Share Common Consideration” shall have the meaning set
forth in the Merger Agreement.



     (2) Section 3.04 is amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:




“SECTION 3.04. Payment of Excess Benefit Account. Upon the
occurrence of the Merger Effective Date, the Excess Benefit Account
of each Participant shall be valued based upon the Per Share Common
Consideration and such value shall be distributed,













 






as soon as practical, to each Participant in a single cash lump sum
distribution, subject to any applicable income tax withholding.”



     (3) The Plan is amended by adding the following new Section 5.08 to the Plan:




5.08 Termination. Effective on the Merger Effective Date,
the Plan is terminated and all Excess Benefit Accounts are
nonforfeitable.



     This Second Amendment shall be effective as of the Merger Effective Date, but only with
respect to Participants who agree to the term hereof and to be bound hereby in such manner as is
prescribed by the Company.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, pursuant to a resolution of its Board of Directors, has
executed this Second Amendment.



ARGO-TECH CORPORATION






By: /s/ Michael S. Lipscomb




Title: President




By: /s/ Paul R. Keen




Title: Chief Financial Officer





-2-