alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.2



                            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 ACI Telecentrics, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June, 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, William Nolte, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 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)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operation of the Company.




Dated: /s/ Aug 14, 2002                 By:  /s/ William Nolte
       -----------------------              ------------------------------------
                                        William Nolte
                                        Chief Financial Officer


                                       20
EXHIBIT 99.2


                            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 ACI Telecentrics, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September, 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, William Nolte, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 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)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operation of the Company.



Dated:  /s/ November 20, 2002                        By: /s/ William Nolte
        ---------------------                            -----------------------
                                                     William Nolte
                                                     Chief Financial Officer


                                       24
Unassociated Document


Exhibit 10.13







FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE


AMENDED AND RESTATED


CENTURYLINK, INC.


BONUS LIFE INSURANCE PLAN


FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS












WHEREAS, the Amended and Restated CenturyTel, Inc. Bonus Life Insurance Plan (“Plan”) for Executive Officers was amended and restated effective January 1, 2008 by documents executed on April 3, 2008; and







WHEREAS, the Employer changed its name from CenturyTel, Inc. to CenturyLink, Inc. on May 20, 2010; and







WHEREAS, the Plan needs to be amended to change the name of the Employer effective May 20, 2010; and







WHEREAS, the Employer Provided Benefits under the Plan were defined as life insurance premium bonuses on life insurance policies owned by the executive officer or such officer’s assignee and Tax Gross-Up Bonuses; and







WHEREAS, in its Form 8-K, dated May 7, 2010, the Employer represented that its executive officers have agreed effective January 1, 2011 to waive any right to receive Tax Gross-Up Bonuses under the Plan; and







WHEREAS, the Plan needs to be amended to delete the payment of Tax Gross-Up Bonuses effective January 1, 2011; and







WHEREAS, under Section 6.1, the Employer reserved the right to amend and terminate the Plan.







NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows:







1.            Effective May 20, 2010, delete “CenturyTel, Inc.” and substitute “CenturyLink, Inc.” each place that it appears in the Plan.







2.            Effective January 1, 2011, amend the definition of “Employer Provided Benefits” to read as follows:







“Employer Provided Benefits means the Life Insurance Premium Bonuses.”







3.           Effective January 1, 2011, amend Article II to delete the definition of “Tax Gross-Up Bonuses.”


 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CenturyLink, Inc. has executed this First Amendment on this 24th day of August 2010.













	  	
CENTURYLINK, INC.


	  	  
	  	
By:/s/ R. Stewart Ewing, Jr.   


	  	
R. Stewart Ewing, Jr.,


	  	
Executive Vice-President and


	  	
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          14,036
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                34,500
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     62,437
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           5,911
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             6,006
<LOANS>                                        118,926
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,378
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 238,998
<DEPOSITS>                                     186,867
<SHORT-TERM>                                    24,355
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,011
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,041
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,724
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 238,998
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,321
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,168
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   305
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 4,794
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 947
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,278
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,516
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      225
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,666
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,972
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,972
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,166
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .065
<LOANS-NON>                                        159
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,158
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       40
<RECOVERIES>                                        35
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,378
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,378
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 17
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 17 appear at 87 FR 8196, Feb. 14, 2022.

§ 17.97 Review of departmental records related to the debt. ( a ) *Notification by employee.* An employee who intends to inspect or copy departmental records related to the debt must send a letter to the Secretary stating his or her intention. The letter must be received by the Secretary within 20 calendar days of the date of the Notice of Intent.
( b ) *Secretary's response.* In response to timely notice submitted by the debtor as described in paragraph (a) of this section, the Secretary will notify the employee of the location and time when the employee may inspect and copy Department records related to the debt.
DRAFT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

82°50'0"W 82°45'0"W 82°40'0"W 82°35'0"W 82°30'0"W 82°25'0"W
 

28°0'0"N

28°0'0"N 

27°55'0"N

27°55'0"N 

27°50'0"N

27°50'0"N 

27°45'0"N

27°45'0"N 

27°40'0"N

27°40'0"N 

27°35'0"N

27°35'0"N 

By D. Tyler 2, D.G. Zawada1, A. Nayegandhi3, J.C. Brock1, M.P. Crane1, K.K. Yates1, and K.E.L. Smith1 

Elevation
 

(meters)
 

Topobathymetric data (a "topobathy") are a merged rendering of both topography (land elevation) and bathymetry 

(water depth) to provide a single product useful for inundation mapping and a variety of other applications. 

These data were developed using one topographic and two bathymetric datasets collected at different

dates. Topography was obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED). 

Bathymetry was provided by NOAA's GEOphysical DAta System (GEODAS). For several nearshore areas 

within the bay GEODAS data were replaced with high resolution bathymetry acquired by NASA's Experimental

Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL). These data and detailed metadata can be obtained from the 

USGS Web site: http://gisdata.usgs.gov/website/topobathy/. Data from EAARL and NED were collected under the 

auspices of the USGS Gulf of Mexico Integrated Science Tampa Bay Study http://gulfsci.usgs.gov/. 

Topobathymetric Data for Tampa Bay, Florida 

+16.1 to +32.0 

+14.1 to +16.0 

+12.1 to +14.0 

+10.1 to +12.0 

+8.1 to +10.0 

+6.1 to +8.0 

+4.1 to +6.0 

+2.1 to +4.0 

+0.1 to +2.0 

-0.1 to 0.0 

-0.3 to -0.2 

-0.5 to -0.4 

-0.7 to -0.6 

-0.9 to -0.8 

-1.1 to -1.0 

-1.3 to -1.2 

-1.5 to -1.4 

-1.7 to -1.6 

-1.9 to -1.8 

-2.1 to -2.0 

-2.3 to -2.2 

-2.5 to -2.4 

-2.7 to -2.6 

-2.9 to -2.8 

-3.1 to -3.0 

-3.3 to -3.2 

-3.5 to -3.4 

-3.7 to -3.6 

-3.9 to -3.8 

-5.9 to -4.0 

-7.9 to -6.0 

-9.9 to -8.0 

-11.9 to -10.0 

-13.9 to -12.0 

-15.9 to -14.0 

-29.8 to -16.0 

No Data 

1

U.S. Geological Survey. 

2

SAIC, contracted to U.S. Geological Survey. 

3

ETI, contracted to U.S. Geological Survey. 1 0 1 

Scale 1:80,000 

2 3 4 5 

Kilometers 

1 0 1 2 3 4 5 

Miles 

82°50'0"W 82°45'0"W 82°40'0"W 82°35'0"W 82°30'0"W 82°25'0"W
 

Open-File Report 2007-1051 (revised) 

 ́
 Suggested citation:

Tyler, D., Zawada, D.G., Nayegandhi, A., Brock, J.C., Crane, M.P., Yates, K.K., 

and Smith, K.E.L., 2007, Topobathymetric data for Tampa Bay, Florida:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007-1051 (revised), U.S. Department of Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1051/. 

Internal Map ID: USGS-NWRC 2006-15-0011
### §7142b. Authority

To carry out the activities of the Museum, the Secretary may—

(1) accept and dispose of any gift, devise, or bequest of services or property, real or personal, that is—

(A) designated in a written document by the person making the gift, devise, or bequest as intended for the Museum; and

(B) determined by the Secretary to be suitable and beneficial for use by the Museum;

(2) operate a retail outlet on the premises of the Museum for the purpose of selling or distributing items (including mementos, food, educational materials, replicas, and literature) that are—

(A) relevant to the contents of the Museum; and

(B) informative, educational, and tasteful;

(3) collect reasonable fees where feasible and appropriate;

(4) exhibit, perform, display, and publish materials and information of or relating to the Museum in any media or place;

(5) consistent with guidelines approved by the Secretary, lease space on the premises of the Museum at reasonable rates and for uses consistent with such guidelines; and

(6) use the proceeds of activities authorized under this section to pay the costs of the Museum.

(Pub. L. 106–554, §1(a)(4) [div. B, title IV, §402], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–267.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001, and also as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001, and not as part of the Department of Energy Organization Act which comprises this chapter.
#### Omar Flores SOTO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-72161.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007.*

Filed Feb. 27, 2007.

*452Omar Flores Soto, Santa Maria, CA, pro se.

CAC-Distriet Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Jamie M. Dowd, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Omar Flores Soto, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Ordonez v. INS,*345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen because it considered the new evidence regarding Flores Soto’s possible separation from and inability to support his pregnant wife and expected child, and acted within its broad discretion in determining the evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie showing of the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” needed for cancellation of removal. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D); *Ordonez,*345 F.3d at 785 (“a motion to reopen will not be granted unless the respondent establishes a prima facie case of eligibility for the underlying relief sought”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Frank D. Seinfeld et al., Appellants, v James D. Robinson, III, et al., Defendants.

[715 NYS2d 404]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), entered February 8, 1999, which, upon plaintiffs’ application for attorneys’ fees in a shareholders’ derivative action, insofar as appealed from, referred to a Judicial Hearing Officer to hear and report with recommendations the issue of value of the benefit to the subject corporation of plaintiffs’ recovery on its behalf, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

This Court previously reversed the motion court’s denial of attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs, holding that plaintiffs’ efforts had conferred a substantial benefit upon the subject corporation, and that they were therefore entitled to attorneys’ fees (246 AD2d 291). On remand, the motion court referred to a Judicial Hearing Officer not only the “amount of attorneys’ fees and disbursements to be paid to plaintiffs’ counsel,” but also “the value of the benefit to [the subject corporation] of plaintiffs’ recovery on its behalf.” While we clearly found that a substantial benefit was conferred on the subject corporation, the referral was not improper since, if nothing else, the referral serves as a reminder that a factor in assessing the amount of the fee to be awarded is the degree to which plaintiffs’ attorneys’ services benefitted the corporation, and that such benefit must therefore be weighed and evaluated, even if unquantifiable *(see, United Operating Co. v Karnes,*482 F Supp 1029, 1031-1032). Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.
#### § 108.15 Pre-occupancy conference.

Applicants shall submit a Notification of Intent to Begin Marketing to the monitoring office no later than 90 days prior to engaging in sales or rental marketing activities. Upon receipt of the Notification of Intent to Begin Marketing from the applicant, the monitoring office shall review any previously approved plan and may schedule a pre-occupancy conference. Such pre-occupancy conference shall be held prior to initiation of sales or rental marketing activities. At this conference, the previously approved AFHM plan shall be reviewed with the applicant to determine if the plan, and/or its proposed implementation, requires modification previous to initiation of marketing in order to achieve the objectives of the AFHM regulation and the plan.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2535-0027)

[44 FR 47013, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 20903, May 10, 1983; 64 FR 44095, Aug. 12, 1999]
CITY OF TUPELO „,^^^,^„,^^^^ 

JAC K REED , JR. , MAYO R ...-i^ySPCRTATION 

^ --•:^^ i OPERATIONS 

B\ NOV iL. n 3: [ ^ 

November 7, 2011 

Mr. Dennis DeVany, Chief 

EAS & Domestic Analysis Division 

Office of Aviation 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Tupelo Regional Airport (TUP) 

Docket DOT-OST-2009-0305 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

We have reviewed EAS proposals submitted under Docket DOT-OST-2009-0305 from 

Seaport Airlines Inc. and Multi-Aero Inc., dba Air Choice One for Tupelo, Mississippi 

and determined that they do not meet the current regulatory requirements of 19 seat 

aircraft. Furthermore, the level of service will be a great disadvantage to any airline and 

our airport without support from Delta Airlines, through codeshare and joint ticket 

pricing, allowing passengers to easily flow through the national airports system. 

We appreciate the interest of these airlines, but do not endorse or support these 

proposals for subsidized essential air service to the communities of Tupelo, MS. 

We request that hold-in order 2011-9-5 served September 13, 2011 that prohibited 

Mesaba & Pinnacle Airlines dba Delta Connection from terminating scheduled airline 

service to Tupelo, Mississippi remain in effect until further notice, or until such time as a 

suitable replacement which satisfies the community's needs can be found. 

We would like to thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter. 

Respectfully, 

CITY OF TUPELO 

/ ^ ^ 

^Jack Reed Jr. 

Mayor 

I.AS ! I KO'i SIRt I I • I'OSI' ()t-l-ll 1 IIOX I4SS 

I i t'l I U . MISSISSIPP I ^SSO M IN'' 

llll'lld M (i(>'slMO<i M . |-A \ 60.: S4n :i)V 4
V 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2790 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 

Richard D. Winters, of Hershey, Pennsylvania, for acts of valor on 

June 6, 1944, in Normandy, France, while an officer in the 101st 

Airborne Division. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 7, 2005 

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal 

of Honor to Richard D. Winters, of Hershey, Pennsylvania, for acts of valor on June 6, 1944, in Normandy, 

France, while an officer in the 101st Airborne Division. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR AWARD 

4 OF MEDAL OF HONOR TO RICHARD D. WIN5 TERS FOR ACTS OF VALOR ON JUNE 6, 1944. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized 

7 and requested to award the Medal of Honor under section 

8 3741 of title 10, United States Code, to Richard D. Win-
2 

•HR 2790 IH 

1 ters, of Hershey, Pennsylvania, for the acts of valor de2 scribed in subsection (b). 

3 (b) ACTION DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor referred 

4 to in subsection (a) are the actions of Richard D. Winters 

5 on D–Day, June 6, 1944, in Normandy, France, while ex6 ecutive officer and acting commanding officer of Company 

7 E, 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne 

8 Division, in leading an assault to neutralize four enemy 

9 105-millimeter cannon firing on Utah Beach. 

10 (c) WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—The award 

11 under subsection (a) may be made without regard to the 

12 time limitations specified in section 3744(b) of title 10, 

13 United States Code, or any other time limitation with re14 spect to the awarding of certain medals to persons who 

15 served in the Army. 

Æ
Amendment No.2  to the Settlement Agreement dated May 19, 2010



  
 Exhibit 10.2

 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 dated as of July 13, 2010 (this “Amendment”), to the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT dated as of May 19, 2010, as amended by amendment dated July 2, 2010 (the
“Settlement Agreement”), by and between MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation (“MasterCard”), and HEARTLAND PAYMENT SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation (“HPS”), Terms
defined in the Settlement Agreement and not otherwise defined herein are used herein as so defined. The Settlement Agreement as amended by this Amendment is herein called the “Amended Settlement Agreement.” 

1. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Section 4.2 of the Settlement Agreement, HPS and MasterCard hereby agree that, if the
Unsatisfied Threshold Event shall not have occurred or if the Opt-In Threshold Condition shall have been waived as provided in Section 4.1, MasterCard shall deliver (as provided in clause (a), (b) or (d) of Section 10.1) to HPS
no later than 5:00 p.m., Eastern time on July 14, 2010 the Alternative Recovery Acceptance Report. 
 2. This Amendment may
be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute but one and the same instrument. A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original for purposes of this Amendment. This
Amendment will become effective when it has been duly executed and delivered by each of the parties hereto. 
 3. Except to the
extent specifically amended by this Amendment, the Settlement Agreement shall remain unmodified, and the Amended Settlement Agreement is hereby confirmed as being in full force and effect. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this Settlement Agreement as an agreement under seal as of the date first above
written. 
  

	
	MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED
	
	 /s/ Wendy Murdock

	     Wendy Murdock
	     Chief Franchise Officer
	
	HEARTLAND PAYMENT SYSTEMS, INC.
	
	 /s/ Charles H.N. Kallenbach

	     Charles H.N. Kallenbach
	     General Counsel and Chief Legal Officer
§ 92.76 Copying documents. ( a ) *Consular authority.* The consular officer is authorized to have documents, or abstracts therefrom, copied at a Foreign Service post, if he deems it advisable and it is practicable to do so. This service frequently is necessary in connection with the performance of certain notarial acts, such as the certification of copies of documents.
( b ) *Fees.* The charges for making copies of documents are as prescribed by the Tariff of Fees, Foreign Service of the United States of America (§ 22.1 of this chapter), under the caption “Copying and Recording,” unless the service is Performed for official use, which comes under the caption Exemption for Federal Agencies and Corporations of the same Tariff.
Case 3:07-mj-70076-MRGD Document 8 Filed 02/26/07 Page 1 of 2Case 3:07-mj-70076-MRGD Document 8 Filed 02/26/07 Page 2 of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ROBERTO PALACIOS-SANCHEZ,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00147-CR

Appeal from the

204th District Court

of Dallas County, Texas

(TC# F-1412347-Q)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We further order this decision be certified below 

for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 13TH DAY OF MAY, 2015.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.