alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1

CDI CORP.

Third Amendment to Employment Agreement

This is a third amendment (this Amendment) to the Employment Agreement (the Agreement) entered into as of January 1, 2008 between
CDI Corp., a Pennsylvania corporation (the Company), and Roger H. Ballou (the Executive). The Agreement was previously amended as of April 1, 2008 and March 19, 2009.

For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged by each party, and intending to be legally bound, the parties
agree as follows:



|1. | Exhibit C to the Agreement shall be amended to add the following paragraph to the end of the exhibit:
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With respect to the shares of PCDS which the Executive may earn in 2011 based on the Companys performance in 2010, the
Compensation Committee shall establish, prior to February 28, 2010, the performance targets, the metric on which the performance targets are based, and the dollar value of PCDS which the Executive would earn if the threshold, target or maximum
levels of performance are achieved. The first table in this Exhibit C and the section of this Exhibit C entitled Bracketing of Targets will not apply to the Executives PCDS award relating to the Companys 2010
performance.



|2. | The second table in Exhibit C to the Agreement shall be amended to delete the rows for Target PTP ($), Total LTI Award ($) and PCDS
($) under Year 2010.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Section 3 of Exhibit B to the Agreement shall be amended to replace the phrase if certain levels of Pre-Tax Profit are achieved, in accordance with Exhibit
C with the phrase if certain levels of performance are achieved, in accordance with Exhibit C.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|4. | All other provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties have executed this Amendment effective as of February 25, 2010.



|          |  |                           |  |            |  |                       
|--------- |  | ------------------------- |  | ---------- |  | ----------------------
|Company:  |  |                           |  | Executive:
|CDI CORP. |  |                           |  |           
|          |  |                           | 
|By:       |  | /s/    Walter R. Garrison |  |            |  | /s/    Roger H. Ballou
|          |  | Walter R. Garrison        |  |            |  | Roger H. Ballou       
|          |  | Chairman of the Board     |  |            |  |
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 466 

Notifying the President of the United States of the election of a Sergeant 

at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 16, 2018 

Mr. MCCONNELL submitted the following resolution; which was considered 

and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Notifying the President of the United States of the election 

of a Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate. 

1 Resolved, That the President of the United States be 

2 notified of the election of the Honorable Michael C. 

3 Stenger as Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Sen4 ate. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
408.802 Policy. ( a ) The Director, Office of Communications (OC) has been designated as the central printing authority in USDA, with the authority to represent the USDA before the Joint Committee on Printing (JCP), the Government Printing Office, and other Federal and State agencies on all matters related to printing.
( b ) Prior to contracting for any of the items defined in FAR 8.801, the contracting officer shall verify that the requisite approval has been received by the publication liaison officer or requisitioner.
( c ) The approval from OC or the approval authority designated by OC shall be maintained in the contract file.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 24 (Monday, February 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 8655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02479]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Brenda 
Massey, was lodged with the United States District Court for the 
Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division, on February 2, 
2021, Case No. 1:21cv17-HSO-JCG.
    This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against Defendant Brenda Massey, pursuant to Sections 
309, 402, and 404 of the Clean Water Act (``CWA''), 33 U.S.C. 1319, 
1342, and 1344, for discharging pollutants into waters of the United 
States in George County, Mississippi without a permit, in violation of 
CWA Section 301(a), 33 U.S.C. 1311(a). The proposed Consent Decree 
resolves injunctive claims for relief by requiring the Defendant to 
perform environmental restoration and provide for mitigation of 
temporal losses through a monetary payment to an approved mitigation 
bank.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this Notice. Please address comments to Michael 
Augustini, United States Department of Justice, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division, Environmental Defense Section, Post Office Box 
7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e5959087868a8888808b91ba808196cb808b9781a59096818a8fcb828a93"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="87f7f2e5e4e8eaeae2e9f3d8e2e3f4a9e2e9f5e3c7f2f4e3e8eda9e0e8f1">[email protected]</span></a>, and 
refer to United States v. Brenda Massey, DJ #90-5-1-1-21358.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, 
Southern Division, Dan M. Russell, Jr., United States Courthouse, 2012 
15th Street, Suite 403, Gulfport, MS 39501. In addition, the proposed 
Consent Decree may be examined electronically at http://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.

Cherie Rogers,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2021-02479 Filed 2-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2017162EN.01000201.xml

| 23.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 162/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 162/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8447 — EDF/CDC/Mitsubishi Corporation/NGM)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 162/03)

On 17 May 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8447. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8447. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 2350

_____________________________ G EORGE W ILL , Appellant,

v.

C ITY OF H IGH S PRINGS , a Municipal Corporation in the State of Florida, and H IGH S PRINGS L AND D EVELOPMENT , LLC
, Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Monica J. Brasington , Judge

. June 25, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W ETHERELL , R AY , and O STERHAUS , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

John M. Wagner, High Springs
, for Appellant.

Meagan L. Logan, Jacksonville; Thomas J. Kennon, III
, and John J. Joyce, Lake City
, for Appellee s

.
408.1103 Contract requirements. If the requirement includes the need for the vendor to provide operational maintenance such as fueling, lubrication, or other fluid changes or replenishment, the contracting officer shall include in the contract: ( 1 ) A requirement for the use of fluids and lubricants containing the maximum available amounts of recovered materials, and alternative fuels whenever available; and
( 2 ) A preference for retreaded tires meeting the Federal retread specifications, tires with the maximum recovered material content, or retreading services for the tires on the vehicle.
[70 FR 45, Jan. 3, 2005]
#### 335.070 Cost-sharing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-1566

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, for the use and

benefit of Tri-M Electrical Contractors,

Incorporated,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ADAMS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INCORPORATED;

UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenwood. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District

Judge. (CA-99-799-9-8)

Submitted: October 10, 2001 Decided: October 22, 2001

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William M. Koontz, Steven L. Smith, SMITH & COLLINS, North Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Daniel J. Weber, Atlanta,

Georgia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tri-M Electrical Contractors, Incorporated (“Tri-M”) appeals

a district court order granting partial summary judgment to Adams

Construction Company Incorporated and United States Fidelity &

Guaranty Company dismissing Tri-M’s claim under the Miller Act, 40

U.S.C.A. §§ 270a et seq. (West 1986 & Supp. 2001), and dismissing

the remaining claims without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s oral findings and find no error. See

United States f/u/b Interstate Mechanical Construction v. International Fidelity Ins. Co., 200 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 2000); United

States f/u/b Noland Co. v. Andrews, 406 F.2d 790 (4th Cir. 1969).

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States f/u/b v. Adams Constr. Co., No. CA-99-799-9-8 (D.S.C.

filed Mar. 26, 2001; entered Mar. 28, 2001). 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.

AFFIRMED
Amended Schedule to the Forms of Indemnification Agt



 Exhibit 10.1 
 Amended Schedule to the Forms of 
 Indemnification Agreement 
 Sunoco, Inc. has entered into Indemnification Agreements with the directors, executive officers, trustees, fiduciaries, employees or agents named
below: 
  

			
	 Employee
	  	 Date of Agreement

	 Michael J. Colavita
	  	September 2, 2004
	 Lynn L. Elsenhans
	  	August 8, 2008
	 Bruce G. Fischer
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Peter J. Gvazdauskas
	  	February 4, 2009
	 Vincent J. Kelley
	  	February 2, 2006
	 Joseph P. Krott
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Michael S. Kuritzkes
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Michael J. McGoldrick
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Brian P. MacDonald
	  	August 10, 2009
	 Christopher J. Minnich
	  	June 1, 2009
	 Ann C. Mulé
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Marie A. Natoli
	  	March 3, 2006
	 Robert W. Owens
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Bruce D. Rubin
	  	October 15, 2008
	 Thomas J. Scargle
	  	July 2, 2009
	 Michael J. Thomson
	  	May 30, 2008
	 Dennis Zeleny
	  	January 20, 2009
		
	  
	  	
	 Robert M. Aiken, Jr.*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 Robert H. Campbell*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 John F. Carroll*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Terence P. Delaney*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Michael H. R. Dingus*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 John G. Drosdick*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Jack L. Foltz*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 David E. Knoll*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 Deborah M. Fretz*
	  	September 6, 2001
	 Michael J. Hennigan*
	  	February 2, 2006
	 Thomas W. Hofmann*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Joel H. Maness*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Paul A. Mulholland*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Rolf D. Naku*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Alan J. Rothman*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Malcolm I. Ruddock, Jr.*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 David C. Shanks*
	  	February 17, 1997
	 Sheldon L. Thompson*
	  	February 1, 1996
	 Ross S. Tippin, Jr.*
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Charles K. Valutas*
	  	March 4, 2004

  

	*	In a different position or no longer with the Company. 









			
	 Director
	  	 Date of Agreement

	 Robert J. Darnall
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Gary W. Edwards
	  	May 1, 2008
	 Ursula O. Fairbairn
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Thomas P. Gerrity
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Rosemarie B. Greco
	  	March 4, 2004
	 John P. Jones, III
	  	September 8, 2006
	 James G. Kaiser
	  	March 4, 2004
	 John W. Rowe
	  	March 4, 2004
	 John K. Wulff
	  	March 8, 2004
		
	  
	  	
	 Raymond E. Cartledge**
	  	September 6, 2001
	 Robert E. Cawthorn**
	  	February 1, 1996
	 John G. Drosdick**
	  	March 4, 2004
	 Mary J. Evans**
	  	September 6, 2001
	 Robert D. Kennedy**
	  	September 6, 2001
	 Richard H. Lenny**
	  	February 8, 2002
	 Norman S. Matthews**
	  	September 6, 2001
	 R. Anderson Pew**
	  	March 4, 2004
	 William B. Pounds**
	  	February 1, 1996
	 G. Jackson Ratcliffe**
	  	March 4, 2004

  

	**	No longer serving on the Board. 

  

 2
|    |                                                                                                                                 |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended April 30, 2013 of Flow International Corporation; |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |

|                                            |
|--------------------------------------------|
|                                            |  |
| /s/ Allen M. Hsieh                         |   |
| Allen M. Hsieh                             |   |
| Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |   |
| August 28, 2013                       |   |
#### DICKER v. COHEN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 22, 1903.)

Dissenting opinion. For majority opinion, see 84 N. Y. Supp. 189.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and GILDERSLEEVE and MacLEAN, JJ.

MacLEAN, J.

The defendants, “insurance adjusters,” undertook to obtain payment of a fire loss incurred by the brother-in-law and assignor of the plaintiff, who was brought to the Cohens by one Feingold, an insurance agent. Some arrangement of employment was made. Dicker asserts with positiveness and circumstance that the compensation was to be 10 per cent. The defendants say that it was to be per cent., and, having collected $300, they gave him $150. The trial justice believed the plaintiff’s story, and rendered judgment for $100, striking something for some items, thus leaving the plaintiff $20 less than his demand, which was for the difference between 10 per cent, and 50 per cent, on $300. The learned justice had enough before him to sustain his determination and the judgment. Besides its own coherent plausibility, plaintiff’s story was strongly corroborated by the defendants. One of them testified that the ordinary commission for collection was 5 per cent, to 10 per cent. In the agreement for compensation, signed in a struggling way by the plaintiff, the figures “50” are crowded together on the printed form in a manner suggesting that the “o” was added. Admittedly collecting but $300, the Cohens, as if forefending trouble, had Dicker sign a receipt for the full $300. They then drew a check for $150, had Dicker indorse it, then erased the drawer’s signature, and gave him $150 in monev. It is not necessary to go far afield from the record for evidence of turpitude and tergiversation. Besides all, the defendants had in court Feingold, who brought in Dicker, and who was very like their agent on their showing. Dicker says they told him he was their agent, and that what he said was as good as what they said, and that he was the persuading factor, was participant in much of the whole, business, and was in court; and they did not call Feingold.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee 

for the CMLTI Asset-Backed PassThrough Certificates, Series 2007-AMC3 

 Plaintiff,

v.

Kevin Maloney; Argent Mortgage 

Company, LLC; Mortgage Electronic 

Registration System Inc., as a Nominee for 

WMC Mortgage Corp.

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No: 1:12-cv-2462

Judge: Honorable Elaine E. Bucklo

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NUNC PRO TUNC

NOW COMES, Plaintiff, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for the CMLTI 

Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-AMC3, by and through its attorneys, 

Potestivo & Associates, P.C., and moves for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc pursuant to the Court’s 

October 23, 2013 ruling. In support thereof, Plaintiff states as follows:

1. On April 3, 2012 Plaintiff filed its Complaint to Foreclose Mortgage.

2. On October 23, 2013 this Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

3. To proceed with the sale of this property, Plaintiff needs a Judgment of Foreclosure as 

sought in its Complaint.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court enter a Judgment of Foreclosure 

with a nunc pro tunc date of October 23, 2013.

 By:____/s/ Megan Christine Adams__________

Potestivo & Associates, P.C.

Megan C. Adams (ARDC #6312221)

223 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 610

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Telephone: (312) 263-0003

Main Fax: (312) 263-0002

Cook County Firm ID #: 43932

DuPage County Firm ID #: 223623

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Our File No.: C14-96033
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
CHARLOTTE TAYLOR

- TILLOTSON , AND ON BEHALF OF LAWRENCE J OSEPH TILLOTSON ( DECEASED), Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES, Appellee.

______________________

2014

- 5101

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:13

- cv

- 00016

- CFL, Judge Charles F. Lettow.

______________________
ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R Charlotte Taylor

- Tillotson moves without opposition for a 60

- day extension of time to file her reply brief. Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : Case: 14-5101 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 10/29/2014TAYLOR

- TILLOTSON v. US 2

The motion is granted to the extent that Taylor

Tillotson’s reply brief is due no later than December 29, 2014.

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

s27 Case: 14-5101 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 10/29/2014
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

|                                                              |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                              | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services Home |
|                                                              |

Eligible applicants  include institutions of higher education (IHEs), local education agencies  (LEAs), nonprofit organizations, state education agencies (SEAs), and other organizations  and/or agencies

In addition to the  categories above, public charter schools that are LEAs under state law, other  public agencies, private nonprofit organizations, for-profit organizations,  outlying areas (American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the  U.S. Virgin Islands), freely associated states, and Indian tribes or tribal organizations.

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - Higher Education Rulemaking
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Elevating Teaching
          - Early Learning
          - Engage Every Student
          - Unlocking Career Success
          - Cybersecurity

 

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
          - vote.gov