alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w2w13



 






EXHIBIT 10.2.13




Ask Jeeves, Inc.

Named Executive Officer Compensation

Summary Sheet

(Q4 2004)



This summary sheet reports recent salary changes, bonus awards and other compensation paid during
(or in respect of) the recently completed quarter to Ask Jeeves’ current executive officers who were named in the
Summary Compensation Table in the Proxy Statement circulated by the Board of Directors in
connection with Ask Jeeves’ 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, all of whom are expected to so
appear in the Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting (the “Named Executive Officers”). These
changes might be deemed to be non-written amendments to each officer’s existing compensation
arrangements with Ask Jeeves, Inc. (or in the case of Mr. Cox, with Ask Jeeves Internet, Ltd.).
These changes arise from the following events:





	 	•  	On October 28, 2004, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Ask Jeeves,
Inc. (the “Compensation Committee”) approved 2005 salary levels for the Named Executive
Officers, as reported below.
	 
	 	•  	On February 2, 2005, the Compensation Committee approved the individual performance
component and the company performance component to be used in the calculation of each Named
Executive Officer’s Fourth Quarter and Year-End 2004 bonus calculations under the Ask
Jeeves Management Bonus Plan. Each Named Executive Officer’s aggregate bonus plan payout
is shown below.
	 
	 	•  	On February 17, 200, the Compensation Committee approved an additional year-end
discretionary bonus for all Ask Jeeves employees (other than new hires), in which the Named
Executive Officers also participated as shown below.





	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Named	 	 	 	2005	 	 	 	Special	 	 	 
	Executive	 	2005	 	Bonus	 	Bonus Plan	 	Discretionary	 	Other Q404	 
	Officer	 	Base Salary	 	(target–max)	 	Payout (1)	 	Bonus (2)	 	Compensation	 
	A. George Battle
	 	$200,000*	 	60%–120%*	 	$56,160	 	$2,250	 	—	 	 
	Steve Berkowitz
	 	$425,000	 	80%–160%*	 	$190,910	 	$2,250	 	—	 	 
	Adrian Cox
	 	£175,000*	 	50%–100%	 	£18,856	 	£1,200	 	—	 	 
	Steve Sordello
	 	$265,000	 	50%–100%	 	$74,399	 	$2,250	 	—	 	 
	Brett Robertson
	 	$235,000	 	50%–100%	 	$63,039	 	$2,250	 	—	 	 












	*	 	no change from prior period
	 
	(1)	 	Paid in the first quarter of 2005 for performance
in the fourth quarter of 2004 and year-end 2004, pursuant to Ask Jeeves’ Executive Management Cash Bonus Plan.
	 
	(2)	 	Paid in the first quarter of 2005 for the Company’s 2004 performance.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1980

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1980 appear at 80 FR 9905, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1980.433 Flood or mudslide hazard area precautions.

(See subpart A, § 1980.42.)

## Administrative

The State Director is responsible for determining if a project is located in a special flood or mudslide hazard area. Refer to subpart B of part 1806 of this chapter [RD Instruction 426.2].
#### § 20.2 Administration.

The regulations of this part will be administered by the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) under the general supervision of the Administrator, FAS. Information pertaining to these regulations may be obtained from the office specified in § 20.10.

[Amdt. 3, 45 FR 8562, Feb. 8, 1980]
ATTACHMENT A 

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 

• VOC Limits and Effective Dates 

 Establish VOC limit of 50 grams per liter (g/l) of material for the use of direct-contact 

lubricants, 75 g/l of material for metalworking fluids and 130 g/l of material for 

precision metal removal fluids, effective January 1, 2012. Distinguish military 

specified rust preservatives from general metal protecting fluids and establish a limit 

of 340 g/l, effective January 1, 2011. Exempt the use of dimethyl carbonate for a 

unique metalworking application. 

• VOC Content Test Method 

 Establish a thermogravimetric test method or methods to determine VOC content of 

applicable fluids. ASTM E 1868-10, with work instructions, and SCAQMD Method 

319 are both included in the rule. 

• Prohibition of Sale 

 Expand the prohibition of sale to include the newly incorporated categories. Prohibit 

the sale of non-compliant lubricants and rust inhibitors. 

• Sell-through Provision 

 Expand the sell-through provision to allow metalworking fluids and direct-contact 

lubricants manufactured prior to the appropriate effective date to be sold or applied 

for six months. 

• Container Labeling 

 Require containers for all fluids subject to the rule to display the date of manufacture 

and VOC content. This provision does not apply to consumer products. 

• Recordkeeping 

 Streamline the recordkeeping provisions to allow facilities an alternative to daily 

recordkeeping. 

• Administrative 

 Require manufacturers and suppliers of metalworking fluids and direct-contact 

lubricants to submit annual quantity and emission reports for a three year period.
#### § 1783.6 When will applications for grants be accepted?

A FOA will be posted to *www.Grants.gov* in fiscal years that funds are available for this program. The FOA will establish the period during which applications for such funds may be submitted for consideration.

[83 FR 45034, Sept. 5, 2018]
§ 1753.93 Responsibilities. ( a ) *Responsibilities transferred to certification borrowers.* ( 1 ) Approval of engineering and architectural service contracts.
( 2 ) Approval of P&S.
( 3 ) Approval of price quotations and bids, except where the low price bid is not accepted.
( 4 ) Approval of award of construction contracts and amendments.
( 5 ) Approval of FAP's if RUS has approved the force account method of construction for the construction project.
( 6 ) Inspection and certification of construction.
( 7 ) Approval of closeout documents.
( 8 ) Other responsibilities as may be specifically granted in writing by RUS.
( b ) *Responsibilities retained by RUS.* ( 1 ) Approval to deviate from RUS requirements, except as provided in (a) above.
( 2 ) Approval of use of loan funds for projects other than those included in the loan construction budget. See 7 CFR part 1744 subpart C.
( 3 ) Approval of use of loan funds in excess of amounts included in the loan budget.
( 4 ) Approval of force account methods of engineering and construction.
( 5 ) Approval to make significant deviations from the work plan approved by RUS.
( 6 ) Approval of interim construction.
( 7 ) Approval to modify or alter standard forms and contracts.
( 8 ) Approval to open bids when fewer than the required number have been received. (90) Approval of outside plant layouts.
( 10 ) “Buy American” determinations.
( 11 ) Other responsibilities not specifically transferred by this subpart or in writing by RUS.
[55 FR 3574, Feb. 2, 1990. Redesignated at 55 FR 39397, Sept. 27, 1990, as amended at 81 FR 71585, Oct. 18, 2016]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBOREAS AFM-07 SRC Surface Meteorological DataThe Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC) collected surface meteorological and radiation data from December 1993 until December 1996. The data set comprises Suite A (meteorological and energy balance measurements) and Suite B (diffuse solar and longwave measurements) components. Suite A measurements were taken at each of ten sites, and Suite B measurements were made at five of the Suite A sites. The data cover an approximate area of 500 km (North-South) by 1000 km (East-West) (a large portion of northern Manitoba and northern Saskatchewan). The measurement network was designed to provide researchers with a sufficient record of near-surface meteorological and radiation measurements. The data are provided in tabular ASCII files, and were collected by Aircraft Flux and Meteorology (AFM)-7. The surface meteorological and radiation data are available from the Earth Observing System Data and Information System (EOSDIS) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC). The data files are available on a CD-ROM (see document number 20010000884).Document ID20000116582Acquisition SourceGoddard Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsOsborne, Heather*(Saskatchewan Research Council Saskatchewan Canada)*Hall, Forrest G.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD United States)*Newcomer, Jeffrey A.*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Young, Kim*(Saskatchewan Research Council Saskatchewan Canada)*Wittrock, Virginia*(Saskatchewan Research Council Saskatchewan Canada)*Shewchuck, Stan*(Saskatchewan Research Council Saskatchewan Canada)*Smith, David E.Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 2000Subject CategoryEarth Resources And Remote SensingReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:209891/VOL15NASA/TM-2000-209891/VOL15Rept-2000-03136-0/VOL15Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 462-33-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20000116582.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### § 201.59 Application.

Tolerances shall be recognized between the percentages or rates of occurrence found by analysis, test, or examination in the administration of the Act and percentages or rates of occurrence required or stated as required by the Act. Tolerances for purity percentages and germination percentages provided for in §§ 201.60 and 201.63 shall be determined from the mean of (a) the results being compared, or (b) the result found by test and the figures shown on a label, or (c) the result found by test and a standard. All other tolerances, including tolerances for pure-live seed and fluorescence, and tolerances for purity based on 10 to 1,000 seeds, seedlings, or plants shall be determined from the result or results found in the administration of the Act.

[5 FR 34, Jan. 4, 1940, as amended at 20 FR 7940, Oct. 21, 1955; 24 FR 3954, May 15, 1959; 35 FR 6108, Apr. 15, 1970; 85 FR 40583, July 7, 2020]
#### Ronald Seabrook et al., Appellants, v Good Samaritan Hospital et al., Respondents.

In a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal (by permission) from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 2, 1979, which, *inter alia,*denied their motion for an order directing that the previously unanimous findings of the medical malpractice panel be signed, or in the alternative, for an order directing a *de novo*determination before a new medical malpractice panel. Order reversed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements payable jointly by respondents appearing sepa*850rately and filing separate briefs, and motion granted to the extent that the matter is remitted for a *de novo*hearing on the issue of malpractice before a new panel. Pursuant to section 148-a of the Judiciary Law and Part 684 of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR Part 684), a medical malpractice panel conducted a hearing and unanimously found: (1) that there was no liability on the part of defendants Good Samaritan Hospital and David Fine; and (2) that there was liability on the part of defendants Ralph Davidoff and William H. Bloom. Before those findings were reduced to writing, defendant Bloom telephoned the physician on the panel and requested that he reconsider. The physician did reconsider and, after re-examining the file, he changed his mind with respect to Drs. Bloom and Davidoff. Plaintiffs then moved for an order directing the physician to sign the previously unanimous finding of the medical malpractice panel that Drs. Bloom and Davidoff were liable, or in the alternative, for the appointment of a new physician panelist. In an order dated May 2, 1979, that motion was denied; the order stated "that there is no unanimous malpractice panel verdict as to the defendants Ralph Davidoff and William H. Bloom.” Dr. Bloom concedes that his ex parte communication was improper. Since there is no way of knowing to what extent that communication influenced the physician panelist’s handling of the case, the findings of the panel must be vacated in their entirety, and the matter remanded for a *de novo*hearing on the issue of malpractice before a new panel (see *De Camp v Good Samaritan Hosp.,*66 AD2d 766). Rabin, J. P., Cohalan, Martuscello and Weinstein, JJ;, concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable  material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; B Cell Responses.                    

*Date:*                         January 11, 2011.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lynn Rust, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, NIAID/NIH/DHHS, Room 3120, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-3938,                         *lr228v@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 4, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-28459 Filed 11-10-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
NonRoad2008a screenshots are provided below which incorporate the inputs used to run the model.

The above shows the in formation entered on the NonRoad20 08a Options form for the 2011 Shelby County No n road Model Equipment run for a typical ozone season day.

The above shows the information entered on the NonRoad2008a Period form for the 2011 Shelby County Nonroad Model Equipment run.The above shows the information entered on the NonRoad2008a Region form for the 2011 Shel by

County Nonroad Model Equipment run.

The above shows the information entered on the NonRoad2008a Sources form f or the 2011 Shelby County Nonroad Model Equipment run.
98- 1216.

#### State ex rel. Fraley v. Indus. Comm.

Franklin App. No. 97APD06-743. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. It appears from the records of this court that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due August 31,1998, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed *sua sponte.*
# Continuation of Emergency With Respect to Weapons of Mass Destruction

                        On November 14, 1994, by Executive Order 12938, the President declared a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons (weapons of mass destruction) and the means of delivering such weapons.  On July 28, 1998, the President issued Executive Order 13094 amending Executive Order 12938 to respond more effectively to the worldwide threat of weapons of mass destruction proliferation activities.  On June 28, 2005, the President issued Executive Order 13382 which,                         *inter alia*, further amended Executive Order 12938 to improve our ability to combat proliferation.  The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States; therefore, the national emergency first declared on November 14, 1994, and extended in each subsequent year, must continue.  In accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12938, as amended.                    

                        This notice shall be published in the                         *Federal Register*                        and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. 2010-28335

Billing code 3195-W1-P
Exhibit 32.1**Certification of Interim Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906**In connection with the quarterly report of Orchids Paper Products Company (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Keith R. Schroeder, Interim Chief Executive Officer andPresident of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) andSection 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section906 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                   /s/ Keith R. Schroeder   Keith R. Schroeder   Interim Chief Executive Officer andPresident
Reaction ‐ Sanitized
Order entered May 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00152-CR

JESUS DIAZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14-76863-M

ORDER

The reporter’s record was due March 31, 2019. The clerk’s record shows the record was 

requested on February 4, 2019. By letter dated April 3, 2019, we notified court reporter Belinda 

Baraka that it was overdue and directed her to file it by May 3, 2019. To date, the reporter’s 

record has not been filed, and we have had no communication from Ms. Baraka. 

We ORDER court reporter Belinda Baraka to file the reporter’s record in this appeal 

WITHIN TWENTY-EIGHT DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. We caution Ms. 

Baraka that the failure to do so will result in the Court taking whatever remedies it has available, 

including ordering that she not sit until the reporter’s record is filed.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable Ernest White, 

Presiding Judge, 194th Judicial District Court; Belinda Baraka, court reporter, 194th Judicial 

District Court; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE

JUSTICE
2006-0880.

#### State v. Beeler.

Summit App. No. 22884. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
EXHIBIT 10.10


                                                              March 9, 2005

EarlyBirdCapital, Inc.
275 Madison Avenue
Suite 1203
New York, New York 10016

                  Re:      ISRAEL TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION CORP.

Gentlemen:

                  This letter will confirm the agreement of the undersigned to
purchase warrants ("Warrants") of Israel Technology Acquisition Corp.
("Company") included in the units ("Units") being sold in the Company's initial
public offering ("IPO") upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Each
Unit is comprised of one share of Common Stock and two Warrants. The shares of
Common Stock and Warrants will not be separately tradeable until 90 days after
the effective date of the Company's IPO unless EarlyBirdCapital, Inc. ("EBC")
informs the Company of its decision to allow earlier separate trading.

                  The undersigned agrees that this letter agreement constitutes
an irrevocable order for EBC to purchase for the undersigned's account within
the six-month period commencing on the date separate trading of the Warrants
commences ("Separation Date") up to ________ Warrants at market prices not to
exceed $0.75 per Warrant ("Maximum Warrant Purchase"). EBC (or such other broker
dealer(s) as EBC may assign the order to) agrees to fill such order in such
amounts and at such times as it may determine, in its sole discretion, during
the six-month period commencing on the Separation Date. EBC further agrees that
it will not charge the undersigned any fees and/or commissions with respect to
such purchase obligation.

                  The undersigned may notify EBC that all or part of the Maximum
Warrant Purchase will be made by an affiliate of the undersigned (or another
person or entity introduced to EBC by the undersigned (a "Designee")) who (or
which) has an account at EBC and, in such event, EBC will make such purchase on
behalf of said affiliate or Designee; provided, however, that the undersigned
hereby agrees to make payment of the purchase price of such purchase in the
event that the affiliate or Designee fails to make such payment.

                  The undersigned agrees that neither he nor any affiliate or
Designee shall sell or transfer the Warrants until after the consummation of a
merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition or other similar business
combination with an operating business and acknowledges that, at the option of
EBC, the certificates for such Warrants shall contain a legend indicating such
restriction on transferability.

                                                     Very truly yours,



                                                     ___________________________