alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Home2024 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Kostelancik, David J. – The Republic of Albania – January 2024

# 									Kostelancik, David J. – The Republic of Albania – January 2024							

Certificate of Competency

January 17, 2024

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: Ambassadorial Nomination: Certificate ofDemonstrated Competence — Foreign ServiceAct, Section 304(a)(4)

POST: Republic of Albania

CANDIDATE:David J. Kostelancik

David J. Kostelancik, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service with the rank of Minister-Counselor, most recently served as Foreign Policy Advisor to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley. Kostelancik previously served as Deputy Chief of Mission, and for two years, as Charge d’Affaires, a.i. at the U.S. Embassy in Budapest, Hungary. Other assignments include Director of the Office of South Central European Affairs (overseeing U.S. diplomatic engagement with all Balkan countries, including Albania) and Director of the Office of Russian Affairs, both in the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, as well as Director of the Office of Europe and Asia in the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (including management of USG-funded rule-of-law assistance programs in Albania). Earlier, Kostelancik was posted twice to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, Russia. Other overseas postings include the U.S. Mission to the OSCE and the U.S. Mission to NATO, the U.S. Embassy in Tirana, Albania and the U.S. Embassy in Ankara, Turkey. Kostelancik’s substantive background in Europe and Eurasian Affairs, demonstrated ability to lead large interagency teams, language expertise, and broad diplomatic experience make him a well-qualified candidate to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Albania.

Kostelancik is the recipient of numerous State Department performance awards, including three Senior Foreign Service Performance Awards. He is also the recipient of a Senior Civilian Defense Award from the Department of Defense. A native of Illinois, he is a graduate of the National War College, where he earned a Master of Science. He also received a Master of Arts degree from the University of Michigan, and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Northwestern University. He speaks Russian, Hungarian, Albanian, and Turkish.

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
Exhibit 10.39


 


Description of Director and Executive
Compensation Arrangements


 


A.                       Non-Employee Director Compensation.


 


Annual Retainer for
Service on the Board
- $40,000, payable in quarterly installments plus 1,000 shares of restricted
stock are automatically granted in March of each year, vesting over three
years.


 


Board Meeting Fees - $1,000 for each meeting attended and $500 for
each telephonic meeting attended.


 


Committee Meetings - $1,000 for each meeting attended and $500 for
each telephonic meeting attended, unless the committee meeting is held on the
day of a meeting of the Board of Directors.


 


Annual Retainer for
Chairman of the Audit Committee - $20,000.


 


Annual Retainer for
Chairman of the Compensation Committee - $10,000.


 


Annual Retainer for
Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee — Twice the amount of any meeting fees paid to the
committee members.


 


Initial Restricted
Grant — Upon
joining the Board of Directors, 500 shares of restricted stock are granted,
vesting over three years.


 


Each grant of
restricted stock is made pursuant to the Company’s 2003 Equity Incentive
Plan.  In addition, the Director Phantom
Stock Plan offers non-employee directors the opportunity to defer cash
compensation for up to three years and to receive that compensation (to the
extent that it is actually earned by service during that period) in shares of
common stock rather than in cash after termination of service or a
predetermined period. Such compensation includes the annual retainer, regular meeting
fees and special meeting fees.  Every
non-employee director during his or her term of service has elected to receive
such compensation in common stock.


 

















 


B.                         Executive Officers.


 


The base salaries for the Company’s executive officers who are named executive
officers in the Company’s Proxy Statement effective as of January 1, 2008
are as follows:


 


	
  Arthur M. Coppola, Chairman of the Board
  and Chief Executive Officer

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  950,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Edward C. Coppola, President

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  800,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Tony Grossi, Senior Executive Vice
  President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Economist

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  600,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Thomas E. O’Hern, Senior Executive Vice
  President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  550,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Richard A. Bayer, Senior Executive Vice
  President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  500,000
exv10w06






Exhibit 10.06




2009 INVESTMENT ELECTION FORM

VALERO ENERGY CORPORATION

DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN




Direction of Investments



The undersigned Participant hereby directs that the measurement of the Participant’s account be
determined as if it were invested in the fund options as indicated below.




DEFERRALS OF SALARY AND/OR BONUSES BEGINNING 1/1/2009

WILL BE TREATED AS IF INVESTED AS INDICATED BELOW.




Enter your investment elections: 5% minimum/increments of 5%.

The total of the percentages must equal 100%.

You may invest in any one or more (including all) of the fund options.








	 	 	 
	           % Dreyfus Appreciation (DGAGX)

	 	           % Columbia Income Z (SRINX)
	 
	 	 
	           % Fidelity Intermediate Gov’t (FSTGX)

	 	           % Vanguard Asset Allocation (VAAPX)
	 
	 	 
	           % Janus Worldwide (JAWWX)

	 	           % Vanguard Index Extended Market (VEXMX)
	 
	 	 
	           % Oakmark I (OAKMX)

	 	           % Vanguard Index 500 (VFINX)
	 
	 	 
	           % Price Mid-Cap Growth (RPMGX)

	 	           % Vanguard Growth and Income (VQNPX)
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	           % Vanguard Treasury Money Market Fund

               (VMPXX)







I understand that the elections I have chosen on this form shall remain in effect until I make a
directive to change.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Participant’s Signature

	 	 	 	Date
	 
	 	 	 	 
	«First
Name» «Last Name»

	 	 	 	«Emplid»
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Participant’s Name

	 	 	 	Participant’s Employee ID Number
§ 435.201 Individuals included in optional groups. ( a ) The agency may choose to cover as optional categorically needy any group or groups of the following individuals who are not receiving cash assistance and who meet the appropriate eligibility criteria for groups specified in the separate sections of this subpart: ( 1 ) Aged individuals (65 years of age of older);
( 2 ) Blind individuals (as defined in § 435.530);
( 3 ) Disabled individuals (as defined in § 435.541);
( 4 ) Individuals under age 21 (or, at State option, under age 20, 19, or 18) or reasonable classifications of these individuals; and
( 5 ) Parents and other caretaker relatives (as defined in § 435.4).
( b ) If the agency provides Medicaid to any individual in an optional group specified in paragraph (a) of this section, the agency must provide Medicaid to all individuals who apply and are found eligible to be members of that group.
( c ) States that elect to use more restrictive eligibility requirements for Medicaid than the SSI requirements for any group or groups of aged, blind, and disabled individuals under § 435.121 must apply the specific requirements of § 435.230 in establishing eligibility of these groups of individuals as optional categorically needy.
[58 FR 4927, Jan. 19, 1993, as amended at 81 FR 86452, Nov. 30, 2016]
#### Miller *v.*The State of Ohio.

*Criminal lam*— Evidence *of similar offense*— Unlawful *sale of morphine.*

(No. 16590

Decided December 6, 1920.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Hamilton county.

*Messrs. Cohen, Mack & Hurtig,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John G. Price,*attorney general, and *Mr. Geo. T. Poor,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said court of appeals be, and the same hereby is, reversed on authority of *State of Ohio v. Davis,*90 Ohio St., 100, proposition 3 of the syllabus, and *Baxter*v. *State of Ohio,*91 Ohio St., 167, proposition 3 of the syllabus; and it not being necessary so to do, the court considers in this case no other assignment of error.

And this court proceeding now to render the judgment that the .court of appeals should have rendered, it is ordered and adjudged that the *536judgments of the court of common pleas and the municipal court of Cincinnati be, and the same hereby are, reversed, and this cause is remanded to the said municipal court' for further proceedihgs according to law.

*Judgments reversed and cause remanded.*

Nichols, C. J., Jones, Matthias, Johnson, Wanamaker, Robinson and Avery, JJ., concur.
#### Henry Schmitz, Respondent, *v.*Emil Stahl, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the Municipal Court of the city of New York, second district, for the sum of $153.75 damages, and $17.50 costs.

The action was brought to recover for the making of fifteen galvanized boilers at an agreed price of $10.25 each, and delivered to defendant.

The answer admits that the plaintiff did sell the boilers to the defendant, but alleges that they were defective, not according to the order given, could not be used for the purpose for which they were ordered, and claims damages in the sum of $500.

Seaman Miller, for appellant.

Denman *&*Denman, for respondent.

Freedman, P. J.

The testimony in the case is very voluminous and we have given it careful examination. There is a sharp conflict of testimony upon all the main questions involved, which makes them questions of fact for the trial court to pass upon.

*789“ The decision of a District Court justice rendered upon conflicting evidence, will not bo disturbed in the absence of proof of partiality, prejudice or bias.” Conklin v. Thompson, 29 Barb. 218; Fuerst v. Jacobson, 9 Misc. Rep. 694; 29 N. Y. Supp. 54; or it is clear that injustice has been done. Mitchell Vance Co. v. Daiker, 46 N. Y. St. Repr. 189; or unless the evidence • be of such a convincing character as to lead to the conclusion that the justice has neglected, through mistake, to deliberate upon the whole testimony. May v. Meierdierck, 42 N. Y. St. Repr. 469. Rothing of the ldnd appears in this case. Considerable stress is laid by the appellant upon the exclusion of testimony, by the trial judge, tending to show that the boilers in question leaked and were defective, because of faulty construction and defective material. The testimony offered upon that point would have been competent had it been shown by the testimony in the case that the boilers were in the same condition when they were examined by the expert witness as they were at the time they were delivered to the defendant. Ro such testimony appears in the record, nor does it appear that any such testimony was offered. In the absence of such testimony it was not reversible error to exclude the testimony referred to.

MacLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit 10.13

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT

This amendment (Amendment) is effective as of the date signed by Adaptec (Effective Date) and amends that certain Independent
Contractor Agreement effective as of January 4, 2010 (Agreement) between Adaptec, Inc., and John J. Quicke (Contractor). Unless expressly stated to the contrary herein, all capitalized terms in this Amendment shall have
the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement.

I. The name of the contracting party Adaptec, Inc. is changed to ADPT Corporation.

II. Exhibit A is amended by extending the Anticipated Ending Date in line (b) to January 3, 2011.

Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. This Amendment may be
executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one instrument.

IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representative as of the date set forth below.



|                     |  |  |  |                     
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------
|ADPT CORPORATION     |  |  |  | JOHN J. QUICKE      
|                     |  | 
|/s/ Mary Dotz        |  |  |  | /s/ John J. Quicke  
|Authorized Signature |  |  |  | Authorized Signature
|                     |  | 
|Mary Dotz            |  |  |  | John J. Quicke      
|Printed Name         |  |  |  | Printed Name        
|                     |  | 
|CFO                  |  |  |  | Interim Pres & CEO  
|Title                |  |  |  | Title               
|                     |  | 
|June 25, 2010        |  |  |  | June 25, 2010       
|Effective Date       |  |  |  | Date
<PAGE>

           SCIOS NOVA INC.
  Computation of Net Loss Per Share

  (Calculated in accordance with the
      guidelines of item 601 of
    Regulation S-K.  The effect of
      stock options on loss per
        share is anti-dilutive

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Nine months ended
                                            September 30,
                                        1995            1994
                                        (Unaudited)
<S>                                     <C>             <C>
PRIMARY:
Average common shares outstanding       35,469,524      35,199,502
Net effect of dilutive stock options -
    based on treasury stock method         100,675         421,076
Average common and common equivalent
    shares outstanding                  35,570,199      35,620,578


Net loss                              $(21,487,000)   $(22,502,000)


Net loss per share                         ($0.60)         ($0.63)

FULLY DILUTED:
Average common shares outstanding       35,469,524      35,199,502
Net effect of dilutive stock options -
    based on treasury stock method          90,548         420,182
Average common and common equivalent -
    shares outstanding                  35,560,072      35,619,684


Net loss                              $(21,487,000)   $(22,502,000)


Net loss per share                         ($0.60)         ($0.63)

</TABLE>


See notes to consolidated financial statements

             Exhibit 11.2
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Joseph SIEGEL v. Roger AUCOIN.

No. 63720.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 26, 1979.

In re Joseph Siegel applying for remedial writ. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3547 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3547

   To provide for the conveyance of a parcel of real property in the 
Apache National Forest in the State of Arizona to the Alpine Elementary 
School District 7 to be used for the construction of school facilities 
                      and related playing fields.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 29, 1996

 Mr. Hayworth introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for the conveyance of a parcel of real property in the 
Apache National Forest in the State of Arizona to the Alpine Elementary 
School District 7 to be used for the construction of school facilities 
                      and related playing fields.

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

SECTION 1. LAND CONVEYANCE, APACHE NATIONAL FOREST, ARIZONA.

    (a) Conveyance Required.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
convey, without consideration, to the Alpine Elementary School District 
7 of the State of Arizona (in this section referred to as the ``School 
District''), all right, title, and interest of the United States in and 
to a parcel of real property, including any improvements thereon, 
consisting of approximately 40 acres located in the Apache National 
Forest, Apache County, Arizona, and identified by the School District 
and the District Ranger of the Alpine Ranger District as suitable for 
school and related school recreation purposes.
    (b) Condition of Conveyance.--The conveyance made under subsection 
(a) shall be subject to the condition that the School District use the 
conveyed property for the construction of school facilities and related 
playing fields.
    (c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
description of the real property to be conveyed under subsection (a) 
shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost 
of the survey shall be borne by the School District.
    (d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may require 
such additional terms and conditions in connection with the conveyance 
under subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect 
the interests of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
#### Henry Lee JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-913.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 3, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
October 11, 2011

Ms. Tomora Skinner Parent of Joseph Skinner 1465 Craig Court Port Orange, FL 32129

Dear Ms. Skinner:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from part 121 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulati ons (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your October 5, 2011, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2011-1101), but we are unable to pr ocess your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

 The specific reasons why you need to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside the United States (if applicable).2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we receive this required information from you. Please note that 14 CFR 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/ Ida M. Klepper Manager, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
600

600

650

650

650

W E R L E R D

N E W E L L R D

H A R R IN G T O N R D

¬«5

M ID D L E R D

M ID D L E R D

¬«5

W E R L E R D

N E W E L L R D

H A R R IN G T O N R D

¬«5

M ID D L E R D

M ID D L E R D

¬«5

Beaver Creek

Lake Erie

Scott Creek

Dunkirk

Conference

Grounds

Wright

Park

Beach

WrightPark

Beach

000

FEET

920

000

FEET

950

10

36

08

41

13

14

20

43

15

09

12

35 39

35

42

39

34 38

15

08

14

20

17

17

36

38

19

07

18

19

40

07

42

11

37

18

16

11

13

12

10

34 43

47

47

47

6

6 6

47

47

47

47

47

47

6

47

6

6

47

47

47

47

47

6

47

6

47

6

6

47

6

47

6

47

47

6

47

6

47

6

47

47

6

000m

6

000m

000m

000m

47

E

N

N

940 000 FEET E

960 000 FEET

35'

30"

35'

32'30" 32'

30"

79°

37'30"

30'

30"

30"

42° 42°

30'

37'

42°

22' 79°

20'

17'

79°

42°

30"

79°

30"

22' 17' 15'

20' 15'

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

NORTH OF DUNKIRK, NY

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

NORTH OF DUNKIRK QUADRANGLE

NEW YORK

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is also draft version 0.5.10

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

Zone 17T

Imagery.......................................................NAIP, May 2008

Roads.....................................US Census Bureau TIGER data

with limited USGS updates, 2006

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2008

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 1998

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: New York Coordinate System of 1983

(west zone)

×

Ø

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 8 ́

20 MILS

10° 12 ́

181 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

17T

PH

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

Forestville

North of

Dunkirk

Brocton

Silver

Creek

Dunkirk

NEW YORK
**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 quarterly report of Digicorp, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jay
      Rifkin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities and 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.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





November
                19, 2007
              
              /s/ Jay
                RifkinJay
                  Rifkin
                  Chief
                    Executive Officer