alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.22


 


Description of Director
Compensation


 


All non-employee directors receive shares of CIBER Common Stock valued
at approximately $2,500 for each Board and Annual Meeting attended and are paid a $7,500 semi-annual retainer.  The Chairman of the Audit Committee of the
Board receives twice this retainer amount due to the additional time needed to
fulfill this responsibility.  All
directors are reimbursed for expenses incurred to attend meetings.  The retainer was increased to its current
annual level and a meeting fee of $1,000 per committee meeting attended was
implemented in August 2003.  Non-employee
directors received stock options for serving on the Board under the
CIBER, Inc. 2004 Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) approved by the Company’s
stockholders at the April 27, 2004 Annual Meeting.  Employee directors receive no additional
compensation for serving on the Board.


 


The Plan provides that options for the Company’s Common Stock are
authorized for issuance to non-employee directors under the Plan.  The Plan is administered by the Board.  The Plan provides for an initial grant of
options to purchase 20,000 shares of Common Stock to each non-employee director
when that director takes office.  Each
option granted vests in equal annual installments over two years and expires
ten years from the date of grant.  In
addition, after each year of service, each non-employee director receives the
grant of an option to purchase 5,000 shares of Common Stock; such options vest
fully one year after the date of grant. 
The Plan also authorizes the Board, in its discretion, to adopt awards
for director service on Board committees. 
This provision was added in light of new requirements imposed by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the NYSE, which have increased the obligations of
members of certain committees—especially the Audit Committee.
Exhibit 10.67(b)

[Letterhead of Security Agent]

26 April 2007



|To: | Spansion Japan Limited
|--- | ----------------------

Cube Kawasaki, 1-14, Nisshin-cho,
Kawasaki-ku, Kawasaki-shi

Kanagawa, 210-0024, Japan



|Re: | Amendment to California Law Security Agreement
|--- | ----------------------------------------------

Dear Sir:

We refer to (i) the Senior Facility Agreement dated 30 March 2007 (the Facility Agreement), for Spansion Japan Limited
arranged by GE Capital Leasing Corporation, acting as mandated lead arranger, and Sumisho Lease Co., Ltd. and Mitsui Leasing & Development, Ltd., acting as sub-arrangers, with GE Capital Leasing Corporation, acting as administrative agent
(the Administrative Agent), Resona Bank, Limited, acting as paying agent, and GE Capital Leasing Corporation, acting as security agent, and the financial institutions listed in Schedule 1 to the Facility Agreement (the
Finance Parties) and (ii) the Security Agreement dated 30 March 2007 (the Security Agreement), by and among Spansion Japan Limited, GE Capital Leasing Corporation, as security agent for and
representative of (in such capacity as the Security Agent) the Finance Parties, and the Finance Parties governed by the internal laws of the State of California.

Capitalised terms used in this letter, unless otherwise defined herein, shall have the meaning given to them in the Facility Agreement.

Pursuant to the Security Agreement, Spansion Japan Limited has assigned and granted certain security interests (the Assignment) to the Finance Parties as defined in the Security Agreement. It was
the intention of the parties to the Security Agreement that the Assignment would be granted to the Finance Parties as defined in the Facility Agreement.

We hereby request confirmation by your countersignature and return of the enclosed copy of this letter of Spansion Japan Limiteds agreement to amend the definition of Finance Parties in the Security Agreement to refer to the Finance
Parties as defined in the Facility Agreement.

The provisions of the Security Agreement and the other Finance Documents shall, save as amended by this
letter, continue in full force and effect.

This letter is designated by Spansion Japan Limited and the Administrative Agent as a Finance Document.

This letter shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of California, without regard to conflicts of laws
principles.



---

Yours faithfully,

GE
Capital Leasing Corporation

(Company Chop)



|                              
|------------------------------
|                              
|/s/ Takuji Tohyama            
|GE Capital Leasing Corporation

As Security Agent on behalf of each Finance Party



---

Accepted and agreed

Spansion Japan Limited

(Company Chop)



|                      
|----------------------
|                      
|/s/ Masao Taguchi     
|Spansion Japan Limited
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03- 10 -00 241 -CV

K e r i Ly nn Sm it h , A ppe lla nt

v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s , Appellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY , 340TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. C-08 -02 51- CP S , HO NORAB LE JAY K. WEATH ERB Y , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant fi l ed h er notice of appe al on April 28, 2010, and the cler k’s re cord w as fi le d o n M ay

27 . O n M ay

25 , w e we re inf

or me d th at Ro sem ary

Ros e ha d b e e n a

pp oin te d to repr esent appellant on appea l. On J une 28, we sent notice that the repor ter’s rec ord was overdue, and on J uly 7, the court repor ter informed us that she had not be en contac ted to prepa re the rec ord,
nor h ad p aym ent ar

rang ements bee n made. On July 19, we se nt Rose notice that the re cord w as overdue , requiringthat appellant to make arra ng ements t o pay for the rec ord or otherwise re spond to our inquiry

by J uly 29. We a lso infor med Rose that if we did not rec eive a response by

that date,
we wo uld c on sid e r the a

pp e a l with ou t the re po rt e r’ s re c or d an d tha t the br ie f wo uld be du e Au g us t 9. On Aug ust 31, after

the re cord was not filed and appellant did not respond to our notice , we se nt Rose notice that her brief was overdue , requiringa re sponse by September 10, a

nd cautioning that fa ilure to r e sp on d w ou ld r e su lt i n o ur re fe rr ingthe ma tte r t o th e tr ia l c ourt fo r a he ari ng purs ua

nt t o2

ru l e 3 8.8(b) of

the rules of

appellate proce dure. See T e x. R
. A p p . P
. 3 8
. 8 ( b ) ( p r o v i d ing tha t if counsel for criminal appellant fails t o file brief, appe llate cour t should order trial c ourt to conduct hear ing on w hether

appellant wishe s to prosecute appea l, is indige nt, or has abandoned a ppeal) ; In re T.V. , 8 S.W .3d 448, 449-50 (Te x . App.—Waco 1999, orde r) ( hol d i n g t h at t o adequately protec t ind ig e nt p are nt’ s r ig hts in t e rm inatio n c a se , c ourt sh ou ld a bate a pp e a l to a llo w t

ri a l c ou rt to hol d hear ing to de termine issues ra ise d i n Tex. R. App. P . 38.8(b)) . To date, Rose ha s not responded to o ur inq uir ie s. We t he re fo re a bate the c a

us e and re mand it t o th e tr ia l c ourt , w hic h is ins tr uc te d to hold a hear ing to de termine why no brief ha s been f iled, whether

appellant still wishes to appea l, and whether appellant is indig ent. See T.V. , 8 S.W .3d at 449-50. I f appe llant h as n o t abandone d her
a pp e a l, t he tr ia l c ourt

sh ou ld r e mov e Ros e a s a pp e llate c ouns e l and

a pp oin t a ne w atto rn e y

to repr esent a

ppellant’s intere sts. The trial cour t is inst ructe d to a

rra ng e for a complete r ecor d of the he ari ng , al on g wi th fi nding s o f f a c t and c on c lus ion s o f l aw, to b e fo rw ard e d to thi s Co ur t w ith in 45 day s of the date of this opinion.

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pury ear and Pember

ton Abated Filed: Oc tober 26, 2010
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1 D 2 0 2 3

- 2850

_____________________________ C HRISTOPHER M. S CHURMAN , Appellant,

v.

J OHN T ATE , Holmes County Sheriff
, S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Holmes County

. Russell S. Roberts , Judge

.

May 8, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
D ISMISSED as moot

.
R OBERTS , R AY , and N ORDBY , JJ., concur.

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

.

_____________________________

Christopher M. Schurman
, pro se, Appellant.2 David F. Holmes, Slocomb, Alabama
, for Appellee John Tate, Holmes County Sheriff; Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee State of Florida

.
Exhibit
      14




**NOVA
        NATURAL RESOURCES CORPORATION**
 **FINANCIAL
        CODE OF ETHICS**
 
 As
        a
        public company, it is of critical importance that NOVA NATURAL RESOURCES
        CORPORATION’S (NOVA) filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission be
        accurate and timely.
  The
        Chief
        Executive Officer (CEO) has a special role both to adhere to the principles
        of
        integrity and also to ensure that a culture exists throughout NOVA as a whole
        that ensures the fair and timely reporting of NOVA’s financial results and
        conditions. Because of this special role, the CEO and all members of NOVA’s team
        are bound by NOVA’s Financial Code of Ethics, and by accepting the Financial
        Code of Ethics, each agrees that they will:
  -
        Act with
        honesty and integrity, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest
        in
        personal and professional relationships.
  -
        Provide
        information that is accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and
        understandable to ensure full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable
        disclosure in the reports and documents that NOVA files with, or submits
        to,
        government agencies and in other public communications.
  -
        Comply
        with the rules and regulations of federal, state and local governments, and
        other appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.
  -
        Act in
        good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence, without
        misrepresenting material facts or allowing one's independent judgment to
        be
        subordinated.
  -
        Respect
        the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of one's work,
        except
        when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to disclose. Confidential
        information acquired in the course of one's work will not be used for personal
        advantage.
  -
        Share job knowledge and maintain skills important and relevant to stakeholders
        needs.
  -
        Proactively promote and be an example of ethical behavior as a responsible
        partner among peers, in the work environment and in the community.
  -
        Achieve
        responsible use of, and control over, all NOVA assets and resources employed
        by,
        or entrusted to yourself, and your department.
  -
        Receive
        the full and active support and cooperation of NOVA’s Officers, Senior Staff,
        and all employees in the adherence to this Financial Code of
        Ethics.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, David Zinberg, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed thisQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Bidz.com, Inc.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us by others,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: November 10, 2005
|   | /s/ David  Zinberg       |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | David  Zinberg           |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

TRAVIS CLEMONS,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-73-TKW-MJF

RICKY D. DIXON 

Respondent.

/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based upon the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 19). No objections were filed. Upon due consideration of 

the Report and Recommendation and the case file, the Court agrees with the 

magistrate judge’s determinations that no evidentiary hearing is required for the 

disposition of this matter; that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief; and that a 

certificate of appealability is not warranted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this Order.

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) challenging the 

judgment of conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Travis Clemons, Leon 

County Circuit Court Case No. 2010-CF-1899, is DENIED.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

Case 4:20-cv-00073-TKW-MJF Document 20 Filed 02/28/22 Page 1 of 2
4. The Clerk shall close the case file.

DONE and ORDERED this 28th day of February, 2022.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00073-TKW-MJF Document 20 Filed 02/28/22 Page 2 of 2
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: August 27, 2015 D-60-15

___________________________________ In the Matter of RICHARD P. URDA, an Attorney. COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STANDARDS, ON MOTION Petitioner; RICHARD P. URDA, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2209062)

___________________________________ Calendar Date: August 10, 2015 Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch and Clark, JJ.

__________ Monica A. Duffy, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Michael K. Creaser of counsel), for petitioner. Richard P. Urda, Ithaca, respondent pro se.

__________ Per Curiam. Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1988. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County. By decision dated October 25, 2012, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of one year, which suspension was conditionally stayed (99 AD3d 1165 [2012]). Respondent now moves for termination of the stayed suspension and he has provided a supporting affidavit indicating that the conditions of the stay have been fully complied with. Petitioner-2- D-60-15

does not oppose the motion, which we now grant. McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch and Clark, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that respondent's motion is granted, and the stayed suspension imposed by this Court's decision dated October 25, 2012 is terminated, effective immediately.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
**GAO-04-667G**                      Published: Apr 01, 2004. Publicly Released: Apr 01, 2004.                  

-   
-   
-   
-   

    Jump To:  
-  Elder Abuse 
-  Services for Older Adults 
-  State and Local-Level Drivers and Trends 
-  State and Local Fiscal Projections 
-  Federal Borrowing 
-  Managing the Debt 
-  Summary of Funding Provisions 
-  Auditing the Government's Books 
-  Unpacking the Financial Report 
-  Highlights 
-  Recommendations 
-  Background 
-  About This Work 
-  About This Work 
-  Trends 
-  About the Center 
-  Why It's High Risk 
-  What Remains To Be Done 
-  Key Reports 
-  Newest COVID-Related Reports 
-  AI Use Cases 
-  Flood Insurance 
-  Past Pandemic-Related Reports 
-  CARES Act Oversight Reports 
-  All COVID-19 Reports 
-  Report Suspected Fraud 
-  Subjects 
-  How to Get Notified 
-  Past Reports 
-  Public Health Threats 
-  Explore the FY 2022 and 2023 Funds 
-  Status of FY22 Projects 
-  Lessons Learned 
-  Agency Reports 
-  Recent Reports 
-  Recommendations 
-  Supplemental Material 
-  Full Report 
-  Additional Data 
-  View Decision 
-  Downloads 
-  Previously Identified Actions 
-  Related Pages 
-  Associated Agencies 
-  Tough Choices and Opportunities Ahead 
-  Americas Fiscal Future Key Areas 
-  Retirement Security Key Areas 
-  Current List 
-  About The High Risk List 
-  Area Ratings 
-  Previous High Risk Products 
-  Search Federal Vacancies 
-  Past Federal Vacancies 
-  Violation Letters 
-  About the Yellow Book 
-  Advisory Council 
-  Related Resources 
-  Comment Letters 
-  Related Publications 
-  Contacts and Resources 
-  Major Issues Facing the Nation 
-  Meeting Strategic Challenges 
-  Additional Resources 
-  Resources 
-  GAO Contacts 
-  Mission Teams 
-  Operations and Staff Offices  
-  Organization Chart  
-  Why a Career at GAO? 
-  Am I Qualified? 
-  Company Culture 
-  Reasonable Accommodations 
-  Video Gallery 
-  Paid Internships 
-  Student Volunteers 
-  Professional Development Program 
-  Advancement 
-  Executive Candidate Program 
-  Summer Associates 
-  Externships 
-  Benefits 
-  Contacts 

Skip to Highlights

## Highlights

The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) and the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) maintain the GAO/PCIE Financial Audit Manual (FAM). The FAM provides guidance for performing financial statement audits of federal entities. The FAM is a key tool for enhancing accountability over taxpayer-provided resources.

## Full Report

Full Report (125 pages)

## Office of Public Affairs

### Media Inquiries

Sarah Kaczmarek
kaczmareks@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

### Public Inquiries

Public Affairs
PublicAffairs@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

## Topics

Auditing and Financial Management

Auditing proceduresAuditing standardsAuditorsAuditsFinancial statement auditsInternal auditorsInternal auditsFinancial statementsFinancial audit manualGovernment auditing standards
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JAMI CLAIRE, KATHRYN LANE, and

AHMIR MURPHY

Plaintiffs, 

v. Case No. 4:20cv20-MW/MAF

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

MANAGEMENT SERVICES, et al.,

Defendants. 

_________________________/

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

DISCLOSE EXPERTS AND COMPLETE DISCOVERY

This Court has considered, without hearing, Defendants’ Unopposed Motion 

for Extension of Time to Disclose Experts and Complete Discovery. ECF No. 78. 

The motion is GRANTED. Initial expert disclosures will be due on November 16, 

2020, and rebuttal expert disclosures will be due on December 16, 2020. 

The discovery deadline is now January 11, 2021. 

SO ORDERED on October 28, 2020. 

s/Mark E. Walker

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00020-MW-MAF Document 79 Filed 10/28/20 Page 1 of 1
#### GARDEN HOMES, Inc., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America et al., Appellees.

No. 4786.

United States Court of Appeals First Circuit.

Feb. 24, 1954.

Rehearing Denied March 17, 1954.

Angus M. MacNeil, Boston, Mass., for appellant.

Robert D. Branch, Asst. U. S. Atty., Concord, N. H., for United States of America, appellee.

Before MAGRUDER, Chief Judge, and WOODBURY and HARTIGAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The final judgment of the District Court entered July 16, 1953, is affirmed *282upon the opinion of Judge Connor reported in 113 F.Supp. 415. The order of the District Court entered September 11, 1953, is affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 18, 2010 

Order 

 

March 18, 2010 

138323(54) 

DIANE GADIGIAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 138323 

v COA: 279540 

Wayne CC: 06-621978-NO 

CITY OF TAYLOR, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by the Michigan Municipal League and 

others for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in this case is considered and it is 

GRANTED.
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S

N O

. W R

- 9 1 , 3 3 8

- 0 1

E X P A R T E DAVID P ATRICK BERTRAM, A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R A W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S C A U S E N U M B E R 1 5 1 9 1 5 9

- A I N T H E 1 7 8 D I S T R I C T C O U R T T H F R O M H A R R I S C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m .

O R D E R

T h i s i s a p o s t

- c o n v i c t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s f o r w a r d e d t o t h i s

C o u r t p u r s u a n t t o T E X

. C O D E C R IM

. P R O C

. a r t

. 1 1

. 0 7 , § 3 , e t s e q

. A p p l i c a n t w a s c o n v i c t e d

o f a t t e m p t t o c o m m i t a g g r a v a t e d k i d n a p p i n g , a n d p u n i s h m e n t w a s a s s e s s e d a t f i f t y y e a r s ’

c o n f i n e m e n t

. T h e F i r s t C o u r t o f A p p e a l s a f f i r m e d h i s c o n v i c t i o n

. B e r t r a m v

. S t a t e , N o

. 01-

17-00940-CR ( T e x

. A p p

. — H o u s t o n [ 1 s t ] M a y 3 0 , 2 0 1 9 ) ( n o t d e s i g n a t e d f o r p u b l i c a t i o n )

.

T h e C o u r t r e c e i v e d t h i s w r i t a p p l i c a t i o n o n J u n e 2 2 , 2 0 2 0

. O n A u g

. 2 6 , 2 0 2 0 , t h i s

C o u r t d e n i e d i t

. A p p l i c a n t f i l e d a s u p p l e m e n t a l a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t o n J u n e 2 3 ,2 0 2 0

. W e d i d n o t r e c e i v e i t u n t i l a f t e r w e e n t e r e d o u r o r d e r

. T h e r e f o r e , w e r e c o n s i d e r t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n

. A f

t e r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o n i t s o w n m o t i o n , t h e C o u r t f i n d s t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n

s h o u l d b e d e n i e d o n t h e m e r i t s

. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e C o u r t e n t e r s a n o r d e r d e n y i n g t h i s

a p p l i c a t i o n

.

A p p l i c a n t ’ s w r i t a p p l i c a t i o n i s d e n i e d

.

DO NOT PUBL I SH DEL I VERED: J anuar

y 13, 2021