alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amended Separation Agreement - Mary L. Dotz



 Exhibit 10.1 

 

 

 September 29, 2010 
 Mary Dotz 
 Re: Amendment to Separation Agreement dated June 15, 2010 and Employment
Agreement dated March 7, 2008. 
 Dear Mary, 
 As we have previously discussed, your transiton period is extended and your final termination date is now January 4, 2011. You will remain on ADPT’s payroll and continue to receive payroll
checks through your termination date. Your final payroll check will include any unused accrued vacation. Your current health and welfare benefits will end on January 31, 2011. 
 Your severance pay will be paid out at the original date of 9/30/2010 and no additional severance will be due to you on your final termination date. However, provided you remain an employee of ADPT
Corporation through January 4, 2011, ADPT Corporation shall reimburse you for your COBRA benefits effective February 1, 2011 through and until December 31, 2011 and your outplacement assistance will be available for sign up, for up to
two months from your final termination date. 
 In addition, you will receive a new retention award of $75,000 to be paid on January 4,
2011 if you remain employed by ADPT Corporation through that date. If you are terminated without cause by ADPT Corporation prior to your termination date, you will still be entitled to receive the retention award, the COBRA benefits and outplacement
assistance offered in this letter. 
 Finally, this letter shall also serve to amend Section 8(c) of your Employment Agreement dated
March 7, 2008 to clarify the intent of said Section 8(c). Accordingly, the second sentence of that section is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 
 “Under certain circumstances and conditioned upon Employee’s execution of a release and waiver of claims within 30 days of the Employee’s termination of employment (acceptable to, and in
such form and substance as provided by, Adaptec) against Adaptec, its officers and directors, Employee will also be entitled to receive the payments and benefits as set forth below; provided, however, that Employee shall not be entitled to the
payments and benefits set forth below in the event Employee’s termination occurs following the three-year anniversary of the Effective Date.” 
 [the remainder of this page is left intentionally blank] 

  
 ADPT
Corporation, 691 South Milpitas Boulevard, Milpitas, California 95035 Phone (408) 945-8600 Fax (408) 262-2533 










 

 

  

  
 Please sign and return this memo to
acknowledge your amended termination date and your new retention bonus. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ JOHN QUICKE
	
	 John Quicke
 Interim President
and Chief Executive Officer


  

							
	I have read and acknowledge the above and agree to the transition dates.
		
	Agreed:	  	
				
	Dated:     Sept 29, 2010    	  	BY:	  	Mary
Dotz                                         
   /	  	 /s/ MARY DOTZ

		  	Print	  		  	/ (Signature)


  
 ADPT
Corporation, 691 South Milpitas Boulevard, Milpitas, California 95035 Phone (408) 945-8600 Fax (408) 262-2533
Case 3:08-cv-03331-MHP Document 52 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:08-cv-03331-MHP Document 52 Filed 02/09/10 Page 2 of 3
2/8/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:08-cv-03331-MHP Document 52 Filed 02/09/10 Page 3 of 3
MATS area source spreadsheet 

 12/10/2011 06:53 PM 

From: Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US 

 

To: "Mancini, Dom" <dmancini@omb.eop.gov>, "Higgins, Cortney" 

<cortney_higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

 

Cc: "Wayland, Bob" <wayland.robertj@epa.gov>, "Maxwell, Bill" 

<Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov>, "Culligan, Kevin" 

<culligan.kevin@epa.gov>, "Tsirigotis, Peter" 

<Tsirigotis.Peter@epamail.epa.gov> 

Attached a draft area-source spreadsheet based on the nationwide emission 

estimates we made in the proposal. We have color-coded the units that 

don't appear to meet the MACT limits based on calculations from the 

estimated emissions. There is also a field showing whether a unit meets 

the final MACT limit based on the ICR data. The control technology field 

is a bit cryptic as it appears to assign technologies that are on common 

stacks to only one of the units feeding the common stack. I observed this 

with the Cherokee power plant that lists 4 units and only one appears 

controlled while all 4 have SO2 and PM controls. Given the time 

constraints, we didn't want to delay getting you the info so it's a bit 

less polished. 

Area source_Baseline_Emissions_Estimates_EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-2986(1)_120911.xlsx
§ 96.66 Oversight of accredited agencies and approved persons by the accrediting entity. ( a ) The accrediting entity must monitor agencies it has accredited and persons it has approved at least annually to ensure that they are in substantial compliance with the standards in subpart F of this part, as determined using a method approved by the Secretary in accordance with § 96.27(d). The accrediting entity must investigate complaints about accredited agencies and approved persons, as provided in subpart J of this part.
( b ) An accrediting entity may, on its own initiative, conduct site visits to inspect an agency's or person's premises or programs, with or without advance notice, for purposes of random verification of its continued compliance or to investigate a complaint. The accrediting entity may consider any information about the agency or person that becomes available to it about the compliance of the agency or person. The provisions of §§ 96.25 and 96.26 govern requests for and use of information.
( c ) The accrediting entity must require accredited agencies or approved persons to attest annually that they have remained in substantial compliance and to provide supporting documentation to indicate such ongoing compliance with the standards in subpart F of this part.
** **

**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United StatesCode)**

** **

Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) ofSection 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), I, Michael G.Long, Chief Financial Officer of Edge Petroleum Corporation, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, to my knowledge, that:

(1)                                  theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

 

 
| Date:  | November 12, 2004 |   | /s/ Michael G. Long     |
|--------|-------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |              | Name:  | Michael G. Long         |
|   |              |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement



  
 Exhibit 10.9

 AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO 
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 WHEREAS, Rewards Network Inc. (the
“Corporation”) and Ronald L. Blake (the “Executive”) have heretofore entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of September 13, 2005, which was previously amended effective as of January 1, 2009 (the
“Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Executive desire to further amend the Agreement. 

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 21 of the Agreement, the Agreement is hereby amended as follows, effective as of the date
hereof: 
 1. Section 5 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

“5. Definition of Change in Control. For purposes of this Agreement, “Change in Control” shall have the meaning set
forth in the Corporation’s 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as the same may be amended from time to time.” 
 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this instrument to be executed by its duly authorized officer and the Executive has executed this instrument as of this 16th day of August, 2010. 

 

			
	REWARDS NETWORK INC.
		
	By:	 	   /s/ Roya Behnia

	Name:  Roya Behnia
	Title:  SVP, General Counsel and Secretary
	
	 /s/ Ronald L. Blake

	Ronald L. Blake
#### NELSON, Appellant, v. PARTRIDGE, Com’r, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 23, 1903.)

In the matter of John W. Nelson” against John N. Partridge, commissioner. H. Ringrose, for appellant. T. Connoly, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs ánd disbursements.
### §608a. Fraud under means-tested welfare and public assistance programs

#### (a) In general

If an individual's benefits under a Federal, State, or local law relating to a means-tested welfare or a public assistance program are reduced because of an act of fraud by the individual under the law or program, the individual may not, for the duration of the reduction, receive an increased benefit under any other means-tested welfare or public assistance program for which Federal funds are appropriated as a result of a decrease in the income of the individual (determined under the applicable program) attributable to such reduction.

#### (b) Welfare or public assistance programs for which Federal funds are appropriated

For purposes of subsection (a), the term "means-tested welfare or public assistance program for which Federal funds are appropriated" includes the food stamp program under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), any program of public or assisted housing under title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.), and any State program funded under this part.

(Pub. L. 104–193, title IX, §911, Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2353.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Food Stamp Act of 1977, referred to in subsec. (b), subsequently renamed the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, is Pub. L. 88–525, Aug. 31, 1964, 78 Stat. 703, which is classified generally to chapter 51 (§2011 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2011 of Title 7 and Tables.

The United States Housing Act of 1937, referred to in subsec. (b), is act Sept. 1, 1937, ch. 896, as revised generally by Pub. L. 93–383, title II, §201(a), Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 653, and amended. Title I of the Act is classified generally to subchapter I (§1437 et seq.) of chapter 8 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1437 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, and not as part of the Social Security Act which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Change of Name

References to the food stamp program established under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 considered to refer to the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under that Act, see section 4002(c) of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 2012 of Title 7, Agriculture.
#### In re BORUP’S PETITION.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 17, 1905.)

In the matter of the petition of John Borup for the appointment of commissioners to assess damages to his property, etc.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to resettle order granted. Motion for reargument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, and question certified as follows: “Is chapter 610 of the Laws of 1903, so far as it may be construed to make the town of Eastchester liable for damages sustained through a change of grade made prior to the enactment of that act, unconstitutional and void?”
#### §§ 1600.152-1600.159 [Reserved]
Editorial Note on Part 66
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 66 appear at 64 FR 54540, Oct. 7, 1999.

§ 66.4 Availability of final opinions, orders, policies, interpretations, manuals and instructions. NED is not an adjudicatory organization and therefore does not issue final opinions and orders made in the adjudication of cases. NED will, however, in accordance with the rules in this section and § 526.7, make available for public inspection and copying those statements of policy and interpretation that have been adopted by NED and are not published in the Federal Register, and administrative staff manuals and instructions to staff that affect any member of the public. ( a ) *Deletion to protect privacy.* To the extent required to prevent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, NED may delete identifying details when it makes available or publishes a statement of policy, interpretation, or staff manual or instruction. Whenever NED finds any such deletion necessary, the responsible officer or employee must fully explain the justification therefor in writing.
( b ) *Current index.* NED will maintain and make available on its premises for public inspection and copying a current index providing identifying information for the public as to any matter issued, adopted or promulgated after July 4, 1967, and required by this section to be made available or published. NED will provide copies on request at a cost of $0.15 per page.
### §7297. Cross references

With respect to any functions transferred by this chapter and exercised after October 1, 1977, reference in any other Federal law to any department, commission, or agency or any officer or office the functions of which are so transferred shall be deemed to refer to the Secretary, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or other official or component of the Department in which this chapter vests such functions.

(Pub. L. 95–91, title VII, §707, Aug. 4, 1977, 91 Stat. 607.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 95–91, Aug. 4, 1977, 91 Stat. 565, known as the Department of Energy Organization Act, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 7101 of this title and Tables.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 250 (Thursday, December 30, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 78388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27951]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Meeting Notice

AGENCY: Notice of Resource Advisory Committee, Sundance, Wyoming, USDA 
Forest Service.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Public Law 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and 
Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 016-393) the Black 
Hills National Forests' Crook County Resource Advisory Committee will 
meet Monday, January 17, 2005 in Sundance, Wyoming for a business 
meeting. The meeting is open to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Kozel, Bearlodge District Ranger 
and Designated Federal Officer at (307) 283-1361.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The business meeting on January 17 will 
begin at 6:30 p.m., at the USFS Bearlodge Ranger District office, 121 
South 21st Street, Sundance, Wyoming. Agenda topics will include an 
announcement of recently received Regional Forester's Award, a review 
of previously presented project proposals, and a presentation of any 
new project proposals. A public forum will begin at 8:30 p.m. (MT).

    Dated: December 14, 2004.
Steve Kozel,
District Ranger, Bearlodge Ranger District.
[FR Doc. 04-27951 Filed 12-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
§ 110.25 Description of posters. ( a ) The fair housing poster shall be 11 inches by 14 inches and shall bear the following legend: EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY We do Business in Accordance With the Fair Housing Act (The Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988) IT IS ILLEGAL TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANY PERSON BECAUSE OF RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS (HAVING ONE OR MORE CHILDREN), OR NATIONAL ORIGIN • In the sale or rental of housing or residential lots. • In advertising the sale or rental of housing. • In the financing of housing. • In the appraisal of housing. • In the provision of real estate brokerage services. • Blockbusting is also illegal. Anyone who feels he or she has been discriminated against should send a complaint to: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, Washington, DC 20410 or HUD Region or [Area Office stamp]
( b ) The Assistant Secretary for Equal Opportunity may grant a waiver permitting the substitution of a poster prescribed by a Federal financial regulatory agency for the fair housing poster described in paragraph (a) of this section. While such waiver remains in effect, compliance with the posting requirements of such regulatory agency shall be deemed compliance with the posting requirements of this part. Such waiver shall not affect the applicability of all other provisions of this part.
[37 FR 3429, Feb. 16, 1972, as amended at 40 FR 20079, May 8, 1975; 54 FR 3311, Jan. 23, 1989]
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY LANGSTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

NORTH AMERICAN ASSET

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-02560 SI

ORDER CLARIFYING ORDER

SETTING EVIDENTIARY HEARING

[Docket No. 84]

On February 4, 2010, this Court issued an order setting an evidentiary hearing on plaintiff’s

motion for reconsideration of the Court’s attorney’s fees award. Subsequently, defendant sought

clarification of the scope of evidence the Court wishes to receive in connection with the reconsideration

motion. Accordingly, the Court hereby clarifies its February 4, 2010 Order as follows.

In awarding Mr. Padway attorney’s fees at the hourly rate of $400 per hour, the Court noted that

plaintiff did not present evidence of what Mr. Padway or any attorneys doing comparable work in the

relevant community charge their paying clients. Instead, plaintiff’s evidence consisted primarily of a

catalogue of past fee awards by courts. In preparation for the April 7, 2010 hearing, the parties shall

not re-submit the affidavits and other evidence that has already been presented to the Court, although

they may reargue such evidence in their briefs. The Court wishes to receive new evidence, including

affidavits, that establishes the hourly rates charged to clients by attorneys in the community who

perform work comparable to Mr. Padway’s. The Court will not hear live testimony at the evidentiary

hearing, but will hear oral argument on the briefing and evidence submitted in writing in accordance

with the schedule set forth in the February 4, 2010 Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2010 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02560-SI Document 86 Filed 02/12/10 Page 1 of 1
§ 1000.162 How will a recipient know that non-dwelling structures assisted under the IHBG program meet the requirements of 1000.160? ( a ) The recipient must use one of the methods described in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section to determine if a non-dwelling structure meets the limitation requirements of § 1000.160. If the recipient develops, acquires, or rehabilitates a non-dwelling structure with funds from NAHASDA and other sources, then the cost limit standard established under these regulations applies to the entire structure. If funds are used from two different sources, the standards of the funding source with the more restrictive rules apply.
( b ) ( 1 ) The recipient may adopt written standards for non-dwelling structures. The standards must describe the type of structures and must clearly describe the criteria to be used to guide the cost, size, design, features, amenities, performance or other factors. The standards for such structures must be able to support the reasonableness and necessity for these factors and to clearly identify the affordable housing activity that is being provided.
( 2 ) When the recipient applies a standard to particular structures, it must document the following: ( i ) Identification of targeted population to benefit from the structures;
( ii ) Identification of need or problem to be solved;
( iii ) Affordable housing activity provided or supported by the structures;
( iv ) Alternatives considered;
( v ) Provision for future growth and change;
( vi ) Cultural relevance of design;
( vii ) Size and scope supported by population and need;
( viii ) Design and construction features that are accessible to persons with a variety of disabilities;
( ix ) Cost; and
( x ) Compatibility with community infrastructure and services.
( c ) If the recipient has not adopted program standards specified in paragraph (b) of this section, then it must demonstrate and document that the non-dwelling structure is of a cost, size, design and with amenities consistent with similarly designed and constructed structures in the recipient's general geographic area.
[66 FR 49790, Sept. 28, 2001]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2738 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2738

To amend the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 to provide that a current 
 connection is not lost by an individual who is misled or not properly 
 informed by the Railroad Retirement Board of the requirement for, and 
   the circumstances resulting in the loss of, a current connection.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 26, 2005

  Mr. Stupak introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 to provide that a current 
 connection is not lost by an individual who is misled or not properly 
 informed by the Railroad Retirement Board of the requirement for, and 
   the circumstances resulting in the loss of, a current connection.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Railroad Retirement Fairness Act''.

SEC. 2. EQUITABLE EXTENSION OF CURRENT CONNECTION.

    (a) Equitable Estoppel.--Section 1(o) of the Railroad Retirement 
Act of 1974 (45 U.S.C. 231(o)) is amended by inserting ``An individual 
who, at the time the individual makes an inquiry to the Board, has a 
current connection shall not be deemed to have lost that current 
connection thereafter if the Board misleads or fails to properly inform 
that individual about that requirement and if that conduct by the 
Board, according to the principles of equity, should stop the Board 
from deeming the individual to have lost that current connection.'' 
after the first sentence.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this Act applies with 
respect to annuities applied for on or after February 3, 1989.
                                 <all>
```