alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 211.6 Processing, repackaging, and labeling commodities. ( a ) *Commercial processing and repackaging.* Cooperating sponsors or their designees may arrange for processing commodities into different end products and for packaging or repackaging commodities prior to distribution. Commodities may be bartered, or monetized proceeds or program income may be used, to offset such costs if provided for in the Operational Plan or TA or approved by USAID or the Diplomatic Post. When commercial facilities are used for processing, packaging or repackaging, cooperating sponsors or their designees shall enter into written agreements for such services and copies of the agreements must be provided to USAID or the Diplomatic Post. Except as AID/W otherwise agrees, the executed agreements shall provide as a minimum that the party providing such services shall: ( 1 ) Fully account to the cooperating sponsor for all commodities delivered to the processor's possession and shall maintain adequate records and submit periodic reports pertaining to the performance of the agreement;
( 2 ) Be liable for the value of all commodities not accounted for as provided in § 211.9(e);
( 3 ) Return or dispose of the containers in which the commodity is received from the cooperating sponsor according to instructions from the cooperating sponsor; and
( 4 ) Plainly label carton, sacks, or other containers containing the end product in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) *Use of cooperating sponsor facilities.* When cooperating sponsors utilize their own facilities to process, package, or repackage commodities into different end products, and when such products are distributed for consumption off the premises of the cooperating sponsor, the cooperating sponsor shall plainly label the containers as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, and banners, posters, or similar media which shall contain information similar to that prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section, shall be displayed at the distribution center. Recipients' individual identification cards shall to the maximum extent practicable be imprinted to contain such information.
( c ) *Labeling.* If, prior to distribution, the cooperating sponsor arranges for packaging or repackaging donated commodities, the cartons, sacks, or other containers in which the commodities are packed shall be plainly labeled with the A.I.D. emblem, and insofar as practicable, with the following information in the language of the country in which the commodities are to be distributed: ( 1 ) Name of commodity;
( 2 ) Provided through the friendship of the American people as food for peace; and
( 3 ) Not to be sold or exchanged (where applicable). Emblems or other identification of nongovernmental cooperating sponsors also may be added.
( d ) *Where commodity containers are not used.* When the usual practice in a country is not to enclose the end product in a container, wrapper, sack, etc., the cooperating sponsor shall, to the extent practicable, display banners, posters, or other media, and imprint on individual recipient identification cards information similar to that prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
#### Michael Rogalsky and Another, Respondents, v. French Manufacturing Company, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
#### Continental Manor II Condominium Homeowners Association, Respondent, v David Depew, Doing Business as Depew Brothers Landscapers, Appellant.

[717 NYS2d 206]

—In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), dated January 18, 2000, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and denied his cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered May 15, 2000, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $4,298.31. The notice of appeal from the order dated January 18, 2000, is also deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with entry of judgment in the action (see, *Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the plaintiffs prima facie showing that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The Supreme Court properly rejected the defendant’s claim that he was not personally liable under the agreement he signed. The contract does not indicate that “DePew Brothers” is a corporation *(see, New England Mar. Contrs. v Martin,*156 AD2d 804), and the testimony of the defendant at his examination before trial established that he did not disclose that he was acting as an agent for a corporate principal.

The defendant also failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to the duration of the agreement. The contract expressly provided that “the term of this agreement shall be one year beginning December 1, 1996.” Extrinsic and parol evidence is not admissible to create an ambiguity in a written agreement which is clear and unambiguous on its face *(see,*W.W.W. *Assocs. v Giancontieri,*77 NY2d 157, 163; *Goodstein Props, v Rego,*266 AD2d 506). Accordingly, the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment. O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
§ 171.5 Archival records. The Department ordinarily transfers records designated as historically significant to the National Archives when they are 25 years old. Accordingly, requests for some Department records 25 years old or older should be submitted to the National Archives by mail addressed to Special Access and FOIA Staff (RD-F), National Archives at College Park, 8601 Adelphi Road, Room 5500, College Park, MD 20740-6001; by fax to (301) 837-1864; or by email to *specialaccess_foia@nara.gov .* The Department's website, *www.foia.state.gov ,* has additional information regarding archival records.
Amendment of the AutoNation, Inc. 2007 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan



  
 Exhibit 10.4

 AMENDMENT TO THE AUTONATION, INC. 
 2007 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN 
 WHEREAS, the Board of
Directors (the “Board”) of AutoNation, Inc. (the “Company”) has determined that it is in the best interest of the Company that the AutoNation, Inc. 2007 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”) be amended to
provide for quarterly stock option grants; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board has the authority under Section 12 of the Plan to
amend the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 12 thereof, the Plan is hereby amended as set forth below:

 1. The first paragraph of Section 5 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

AUTOMATIC GRANTING OF OPTIONS. Commencing with the first trading day of March 2011, on the first trading day of each March, June,
September and December while the Plan is in effect, each individual who is at the time serving as a Non-Employee Director shall receive an automatic grant of an Option to purchase 5,000 shares of Common Stock. The foregoing dates are herein referred
to individually as an “Automatic Grant Date” and collectively as “Automatic Grant Dates” and the Non-Employee Directors receiving Options are herein referred to individually as an “Optionee” and collectively as
“Optionees.” Options granted under the Plan are not intended to be treated as incentive stock options as defined in Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). For purposes of this Plan, the
term “trading day” shall mean a day on which the New York Stock Exchange or the principal U.S. stock exchange upon the Company’s common stock is listed is open for trading. 

2. The first sentence of Section 6 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

The price per share payable upon exercise of an Option (“Exercise Price”) shall be the composite closing price of a share of
Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange or the principal U.S. stock exchange upon which the Company’s Common Stock is listed (the “Closing Price”) on the Automatic Grant Date. 

3. The second sentence of Section 9 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

Should an Optionee cease to be an outside member of the Board of Directors of the Company because of Retirement, death or permanent and
total disability (as that term is defined in Section 22(e)(3) of the Code, as now in effect or as subsequently amended), the Option may be exercised in full by the Optionee or, if he or she is








 
not living, by his or her heirs, legatees, or legal representative, as the case may be, during its specified term prior to three years after the date of Retirement, death or permanent and total
disability (without regard to whether such Optionee subsequently resumes service as an outside member of the Board), but in no event after the expiration date of the Option. 
 4. Effect on Plan. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 
 5. Effective Date. The effective date of this Amendment shall be the date on which it is adopted by the Board.
Exhibit 10.9

ADDENDUM TO EXECUTIVE TERMINATION BENEFITS AGREEMENTS

| |  | Dated: [insert date]       |  |                                                                                        
| |  | -------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | SABRE HOLDINGS CORPORATION |  |                                                                                        
| |  | By                         |  | James F. Brashear
Corporate Secretary                                                  
| |  | SABRE INC.                 |  |                                                                                        
| |  | By                         |  | James F. Brashear
Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
| |  | [Executive]                |  |                                                                                        

| |  | Signed: |  |  |  | 
| |  | ------- |  |  |  | 

---



QuickLinks
### §283j. Repealed. Pub. L. 114–255, div. A, title II, §2042(f)(1), Dec. 13, 2016, 130 Stat. 1073

Section, July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §404H, as added Pub. L. 109–416, §2(b), Dec. 19, 2006, 120 Stat. 2821, required review and report on centers of excellence funded under this subchapter.
#### Green Island Contracting Corp., Respondent, v State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 58109.)

Appeal from a judgment in favor of claimant, entered June 6, 1977, upon a decision of the Court of Claims. The factual background surrounding this contractual dispute is adequately detailed in the decision of this court on a prior appeal (53 AD2d 712). Briefly stated, we accepted the State’s arguments directed at the measure of damages awarded for claimant’s third cause of action involving increased costs arising from delay and interference and, since the evidence contained in the record was insufficient for us to make an appropriate determination of that matter, we modified the judgment by directing a new trial limited to the issue of damages on that cause of action. The State now appeals from the judgment entered following the retrial and once again we conclude that a modification is required. Although we specifically stated that "claimant is not entitled to recover its costs and expenses in full for contract work for which it was paid” (53 AD2d 712, 714), the present decision of the Court of Claims nevertheless recites that "all proper costs incurred by claimant during the period October 26 through November 8 should be reimbursed.” It then rejected lower damage figures submitted by the parties on the ground that claimant’s costs were more extensive than those reflected by the respective exhibits for that period and proceeded to make an award based on a document prepared by the State in audit of claimant’s original demands as contained in its bill of particulars. That report merely itemized those amounts which could not be substantiated by claimant’s own records and expressly disavowed any responsibility concerning the remaining balance as it could not be verified by means of auditing procedures. Therefore, the instant decision is flawed by use of a legally erroneous theory of *1115damages and is otherwise factually unsupportable. Our former decision presented claimant with an opportunity to establish its allegedly increased costs by reason of the State’s delay and interference. Since a review of the record convinces us that its proof failed to adequately identify any such items of damage beyond the contract price, a dismissal of the claim as to its third cause of action would be warranted. However, the State apparently acknowledges that some compensable damages were sustained by claimant in this regard, suggesting that its calculation of that amount be accepted, and the judgment should be modified accordingly. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by reducing the award to claimant on its third cause of action to $8,848.10 together with appropriate interest, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Staley, Jr., Larkin and Mikoll, JJ., concur.
### §300ff–67. Use of funds

Counseling programs carried out under this part—

(1) shall not be designed to promote or encourage, directly, intravenous drug abuse or sexual activity, homosexual or heterosexual;

(2) shall be designed to reduce exposure to and transmission of HIV/AIDS by providing accurate information;

(3) shall provide information on the health risks of promiscuous sexual activity and intravenous drug abuse; and

(4) shall provide information on the transmission and prevention of hepatitis A, B, and C, including education about the availability of hepatitis A and B vaccines and assisting patients in identifying vaccination sites.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXVI, §2667, as added Pub. L. 101–381, title III, §301(a), Aug. 18, 1990, 104 Stat. 614; amended Pub. L. 109–415, title VII, §§701, 702(3), 703, Dec. 19, 2006, 120 Stat. 2819, 2820; Pub. L. 111–87, §2(a)(1), (3)(A), Oct. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 2885.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2009—Pub. L. 111–87 repealed Pub. L. 109–415, §703, and revived the provisions of this section as in effect on Sept. 30, 2009. See 2006 Amendment note and Effective Date of 2009 Amendment; Revival of Section note below.

2006—Pub. L. 109–415, §703, which directed repeal of this section effective Oct. 1, 2009, was itself repealed by Pub. L. 111–87, §2(a)(1), effective Sept. 30, 2009.

Par. (2). Pub. L. 109–415, §702(3), substituted "HIV/AIDS" for "HIV disease".

Par. (4). Pub. L. 109–415, §701, added par. (4).

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

#### Effective Date of 2009 Amendment; Revival of Section

For provisions that repeal by section 2(a)(1) of Pub. L. 111–87 of section 703 of Pub. L. 109–415 be effective Sept. 30, 2009, and that the provisions of this section as in effect on Sept. 30, 2009, be revived, see section 2(a)(2), (3)(A) of Pub. L. 111–87, set out as a note under section 300ff–11 of this title.
### §300n–3. Technical assistance and provision of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (a) Technical assistance

The Secretary may provide training and technical assistance with respect to the planning, development, and operation of any program or service carried out pursuant to section 300k of this title. The Secretary may provide such technical assistance directly or through grants to, or contracts with, public and private entities.

#### (b) Provision of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (1) In general

Upon the request of a State receiving a grant under section 300k of this title, the Secretary may, subject to paragraph (2), provide supplies, equipment, and services for the purpose of aiding the State in carrying out such section and, for such purpose, may detail to the State any officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services.

#### (2) Corresponding reduction in payments

With respect to a request described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall reduce the amount of payments under the grant under section 300k of this title to the State involved by an amount equal to the costs of detailing personnel (including pay, allowances, and travel expenses) and the fair market value of any supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Secretary. The Secretary shall, for the payment of expenses incurred in complying with such request, expend the amounts withheld.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XV, §1507, as added Pub. L. 101–354, §2, Aug. 10, 1990, 104 Stat. 414.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 300n–3, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XV, §1534, as added Jan. 4, 1975, Pub. L. 93–641, §3, 88 Stat. 2255; amended Aug. 1, 1977, Pub. L. 95–83, title I, §102(d), 91 Stat. 383; Oct. 4, 1979, Pub. L. 96–79, title I, §§125, 127(d), 93 Stat. 628, 629; Aug. 13, 1981, Pub. L. 97–35, title IX, §933(a)(3), 95 Stat. 570, provided for developing new centers for health planning, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–660, title VII, §701(a), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3799, effective Jan. 1, 1987.
### §§2571 to 2574. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–203, title VII, §714, formerly title VI, §614, Dec. 28, 1973, 87 Stat. 883; renumbered title VII, §714, Pub. L. 93–567, title I, §101, Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1845

Section 2571, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §101, Mar. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 23; Pub. L. 88–214, §1, Dec. 19, 1963, 77 Stat. 422; Pub. L. 89–15, §2, Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 75, set out Congressional statement of findings and purpose in enacting manpower development and training legislation.

Section 2572, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §102, Mar. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 24; Pub. L. 89–15, §§3, 4(b), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 75, 76, directed Secretary of Labor to conduct evaluation activities, obtain and supply information, conduct research, and develop projects to try to avoid or minimize individual hardship and widespread unemployment in accomplishing the objectives of technological progress.

Section 2572a, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §103, as added Pub. L. 89–15, §4(a), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 75, directed Secretary to develop job development programs.

Section 2572b, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §104, as added Pub. L. 89–15, §4(a), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 76; amended Pub. L. 89–792, §2(a), Nov. 7, 1966, 80 Stat. 1434; Pub. L. 90–636, §1(1), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1352 made provision for labor mobility demonstration projects.

Section 2572c, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §105, as added Pub. L. 89–15, §4(a), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 76; amended Pub. L. 89–792, §2(b), Nov. 7, 1966, 80 Stat. 1434; Pub. L. 90–636, §1(2), Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1352, made provision for trainee placement assistance demonstration projects.

Section 2573, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §106, formerly 103, Mar. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 25; renumbered §106, Pub. L. 89–15, §4(a), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 75; amended Pub. L. 90–636, §2, Oct. 24, 1968, 82 Stat. 1352, made provision for a labor market information and job matching program.

Section 2574, Pub. L. 87–415, title I, §107, formerly 104, Mar. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 25; renumbered §107, Pub. L. 89–15, §4(a), Apr. 26, 1965, 79 Stat. 75, directed Secretary of Labor to make reports to President and Congress pertaining to manpower requirements, resources, utilization, and training.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 93–203, title VII, §714, formerly title VI, §614, Dec. 28, 1973, 87 Stat. 883; renumbered title VII, §714, Pub. L. 93–567, title I, §101, Dec. 31, 1974, 88 Stat. 1845, provided that the repeal is effective with respect to fiscal years after June 30, 1974.
Letter Agreement between Tower Bancorp, Inc. and First Chester



  
 Exhibit 10.2


 

 

 October 28, 2010 
 Re: Extension of Maturity Date 
 John A. Featherman, III, President & CEO

 First Chester County Corporation 
 9
North High Street 
 West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380 
 Dear John: 
 Tower Bancorp, Inc. hereby extends the maturity date of the
Promissory Note dated March 4, 2010 made by First Chester County Corporation in the principal amount of $2,000,000 to December 31, 2010. 
 Except as to the aforesaid extension of the maturity date, all other terms and conditions of the Promissory Note and the other Loan Documents (as such term is defined in that certain Loan Agreement dated
as of March 4, 2010) shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
 This letter shall be deemed to constitute an
amendment to the Promissory Note and the other Loan Documents. 
  

			
	 Very truly yours,
  

TOWER BANCORP, INC.

		
	By:	 	/s/ Andrew S. Samuel
		 	 Andrew S. Samuel,

President & CEO



  

			
	 ACCEPTED AND AGREED:
  

FIRST CHESTER COUNTY CORPORATION

		
	By:	 	/s/ John A. Featherman, III
		 	 John A. Featherman, III,

President & CEO
#### Simon Srybnik, Respondent, v Sidney Horowitz, Appellant.

— Order and judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered, respectively, on October 31, 1976 and November 19, 1976, unanimously affirmed on the opinion of Culkin, J., at Special Term. Respondent shall recover of appellant $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Evans and Markewich, JJ.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennever LIVINGSTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-7941.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 26, 2007.

Decided: May 1, 2007.

Noell Peter Tin, Tin, Fulton, Greene & Owen, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dennever Livingston seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 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 Livingston has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and *95dismiss 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.*