alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Compensation Arrangements for the Named Executive Officers



 EXHIBIT 10 (m) 
 COMPUTER TASK GROUP, INCORPORATED 
 COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

 Set forth below is a summary of the annual and incentive compensation paid by Computer Task Group, Incorporated (the Company) to its named executives
(defined in Regulation S-K Item 402(a)(3)) in their current positions as of the date of the filing of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. All of the Company’s executive officers are
at-will employees whose compensation and employment status may be changed at any time at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors, subject only to the terms of employment agreements, as applicable, between the Company and these
executive officers. 
 Effective January 1, 2007, the named executive officers are scheduled to receive the following annual base salaries in their
current positions: 
  

					
	 	  	Current Annual Salary	 
	 James R. Boldt
	  	$	425,000	 
	 Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	  			
	 Brendan M. Harrington
	  	$	200,000	 
	 Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
	  			
	 Filip J.L. Gyde
	  	$	264,500	(1)
	 Senior Vice President, General Manager, CTG Europe
	  			
	 Thomas J. Niehaus
	  	$	229,000	 
	 Senior Vice President, General Manager,
CTG HealthCare Solutions
	  			
	 Arthur W. Crumlish
	  	$	225,000	 
	 Senior Vice President, Strategic Staffing Solutions
	  			

 Executive officers are also eligible to receive incentive compensation each year primarily based upon the
achievement of certain targets. These targets may include specific levels of revenue growth, gross profit, operating income or earnings per share. Bonuses were awarded to the named executives for 2006 as follows: 
  

				
	 	  	2006 Bonus
		
	 James R. Boldt
	  	$	455,163
		
	 Brendan M. Harrington
	  	$	51,400
		
	 Filip J.L. Gyde
	  	$	113,491
		
	 Thomas J. Niehaus
	  	$	188,211
		
	 Arthur W. Crumlish
	  	$	110,265

  

	(1)	Mr. Gyde is paid in Euros. This amount represents his base pay of 200,328 Euros translated into U.S. dollars at the January 1, 2007 exchange rate.


  

 111
Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report of J.Jill, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the
period ending January 28, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |     |  |                        
|----------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 5, 2017 |  | By: |  | /s/ Paula Bennett      
|                  |  |     |  | Paula Bennett          
|                  |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
AFS-12-522-E September 21, 2012

Exemption No. 10630 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0925

Ms. Shannon Butalla

Parent of Samuel Butalla

4801 S. 75 th Street Lincoln, NE 68516

Dear Ms. Butalla:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter received August 26, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Samuel Butalla for an exemption from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow Samuel to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved child restraint system (CAReS, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard a United States (U.S.) aircraft.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Samuel.

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA2

found that numerous people with physical challenges had previously completed flights using restraint systems that addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the petition, if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems by persons with disabilities.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant.

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Samuel Butalla exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Samuel is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Samuel to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard a U.S.

aircraft.

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of Samuel’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Samuel Butalla may only occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Samuel’s parent or caregiver must carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of the exemption at least 48 hours before the date of each flight.

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/ Raymond Towles Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service

Enclosure
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 31 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
H. J. RES. 31

To amend the Constitution of the United States to provide for balanced 
          budgets and elimination of the Federal indebtedness.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

    Mr. Jacobs introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
To amend the Constitution of the United States to provide for balanced 
          budgets and elimination of the Federal indebtedness.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is hereby proposed as 
an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within two years after its submission to the States for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the United States 
government shall not borrow money or any other thing of value except 
for the purpose of rolling over its existing debt balance, and shall 
not issue additional currency except as it reflects additional United 
States productivity.
    ``Section 2. Beginning in fiscal year 2000, and for the next 39 
succeeding fiscal years thereafter, the national debt shall be retired 
by an amount equal to 2\1/2\ per centum of the national debt at the 
beginning of fiscal year 2000.
    ``Section 3. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article 
by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50358

VINCENT ALONZO CORSON, 

 Petitioner - Appellant

v.

LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION, 

 Respondent - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:19-CV-196

Before HAYNES, GRAVES, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

A member of this panel previously denied appellant’s motion for a 

certificate of appealability. The panel has considered appellant’s motion for 

reconsideration. IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.

 * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 12, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-50358 Document: 00515234637 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/12/2019
No. 19-50358

2

The Court has – to the best of its ability – discerned and considered the 

arguments set forth in Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. Upon review of 

the District Court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas application and this 

Court’s denial of his certificate of appealability, the Court finds no grounds to 

grant the relief Petitioner now seeks.

 Case: 19-50358 Document: 00515234637 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/12/2019
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of Owl Rock Capital Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

|   | (1) | the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the information contained in the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Date: March 7, 2017 | By:    | /s/ Alan Kirshenbaum                                |
|---------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                |   | Alan Kirshenbaum                                    |
|                |   | Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer |
#### § 31.3121(a)(4)-1 Payments on account of sickness or accident disability, or medical or hospitalization expenses.

The term “wages” does not include any payment made by an employer to, or on behalf of, an employee on account of the employee's sickness or accident disability or the medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with the employee's sickness or accident disability, if such payment is made after the expiration of 6 calendar months following the last calendar month in which such employee worked for such employer. Such payments are excluded from wages under this exception even though not made under a plan or system. If the employee does not actually perform services for the employer during the requisite period, the existence of the employer- employee relationship during that period is immaterial.
#### Aubree Katie Tietjem et al., Plaintiffs, v Judy Yu Chuan Cha et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents. Centurion Insurance Company, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 600]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, in which the defendant third-party plaintiff sought a declaration that the third-party defendant was obligated to provide coverage, the third-party defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated October 28, 2004, as, in effect, denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint is granted to the extent that the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for the entry of a judgment declaring that the third-party defendant is not obligated to provide coverage in the main action to recover damages for personal injuries, and that branch of the motion is otherwise denied.

In the main action to recover damages for personal injuries, *546the infant plaintiff alleges that she was injured on January 31, 1997, on the defendants’ property. Centurion Insurance Company (hereinafter Centurion), the defendants’ property insurer carrier, refused to defend and indemnify them on the ground that the subject policy had been cancelled before the accident date. The defendants then commenced a third-party action against Centurion seeking, inter alia, a declaration that it was obligated to provide coverage. Centurion moved for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint or, to sever the third-party action from the main action. The Supreme Court granted the motion to the extent of severing the third-party action.

Centurion was entitled to a declaration in its favor on the third-party complaint. In support of its motion, Centurion submitted proof that it cancelled the defendants’ insurance policy effective September 19, 1996 (more than four months before the accident date), and that it mailed notice of the cancellation to the defendants in August 1996. This proof entitled Centurion to a rebuttable presumption that the notice of cancellation was duly received by the defendants *(see Matter of StateWide Ins. Co. v Simmons,*201 AD2d 655 [1994]). In opposition to the motion, the defendants did not deny receipt of the cancellation notice or otherwise raise a triable issue of fact sufficient to defeat Centurion’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, that branch of Centurion’s motion which was for summary judgment should have been granted *(see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

We further note that, under the circumstances of this case, that branch of Centurion’s motion which sought summary judgment was not untimely pursuant to CPLR 3212 (a). H. Miller, J.P., Santucci, Goldstein and Dillon, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Pamela M. Northrup, Appellant.

[804 NYS2d 229]

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J), entered October 18, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon her plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the second • degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05 [9]) and endangering the welfare of a child (§ 260.10 [1]). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses her challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution *(see People v King,*20 AD3d 907 [2005]; *People v DeJesus,*248 AD2d 1023 [1998], *lv denied*92 NY2d 878 [1998]). The waiver of the right to appeal also applies to defendant’s contention concerning the severity of the sentence *(see People v Hidalgo,*91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]), and, in any event, that contention lacks merit. Where, as here, defendant “effects a plea bargain and receives the precise sentence that was promised, [s]he should not later be heard to complain that [s]he received what [s]he bargained for” *(People v Chambers,*123 AD2d 270, 270 [1986]; *see People v McCullers,*40 AD2d 796, 797 [1972], *affd*33 NY2d 806 [1973]). Present—Green, J.P., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 June 2, 2021

a0526

Order 

Clerk

June 2, 2021

162410

SANDRA BIRD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 162410

COA: 350311

Oakland CC: 2018-166539-NO

LOUISIANA GREAT LAKES HOLDINGS, LLC,

MCP CONSTRUCTION, LLC, d/b/a

QUADRANTS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, and

I.S. NORTH, LLC,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

JOHN DOE LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION

COMPANY,

Defendant.

___________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 19, 2020 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000856751
<NAME> FIRST KEYSTONE FINANCIAL
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1996
<CASH>                                           2,598
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          11,592
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     84,551
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          22,614
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            21,730
<LOANS>                                        173,512
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,651
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 310,695
<DEPOSITS>                                     222,173
<SHORT-TERM>                                    27,701
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,509
<LONG-TERM>                                     32,014
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,279
<OTHER-SE>                                       (160)
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 310,695
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,501
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,736
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    68
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,305
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,227
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 702
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,376
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       56
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               2,320
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,638
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    999
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         999
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       615
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .53
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.50
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,894
<LOANS-PAST>                                       263
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,624
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       31
<RECOVERIES>                                         2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,651
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,149
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            502
        

</TABLE>
**
**Exhibit 31.4**

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, Jean-Marc Bellemin, Chief Financial Officer of Gritstone Oncology, Inc., certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Gritstone Oncology, Inc.; and 

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 thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. 

 

Date: April 18, 2019
  By: /s/ Jean-Marc Bellemin   Jean-Marc Bellemin   
Chief Financial Officer

(Principal FinancialOfficer)
**
AMENDMENT TO THE



AMENDMENT TO THE

ALPHARMA INC. 1997 INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION 

AND APPRECIATION RIGHT PLAN 




The Alpharma Inc. 1997 Inventive Stock and Appreciation Right Plan (the "Plan") is hereby amended effective as of June 22, 2006, as follows:



1.    Section 17 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following to the end thereof:
"Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board of Directors has delegated to the executive management Benefits Committee the authority to adopt administrative amendments to the Plan, provided, that such amendments do not involve a change in the costs or liability of the Company or alter the benefits payable thereunder.  The Board of Directors has delegated to the Compensation Committee the authority to adopt all other amendments to the Plan, provided, that such amendments do not significantly increase or decrease benefit amounts, or  are  required  to be adopted by the Board of Directors under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), or the regulations thereunder.  The Board of Directors retains the authority to adopt amendments to the Plan that significantly increase or decrease benefit amounts, or are required to be adopted by the Board of Directors under the Code or regulations thereunder."







***

	
__/s/George P. Rose_________
	
October 23, 2006

	
     ALPHARMA INC.
	
 DATE