alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNATO Status Lists...18. Agreement to Amend the Protocol of Signature to the Agreement of 3 August 1959, as Amended by the Agreements of 21 October 1971 and 18 May 1981, to Supplement the Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces with Respect to Foreign Forces Stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany, done at Bonn May 16, 1994

# 									18. Agreement to Amend the Protocol of Signature to the Agreement of 3 August 1959, as Amended by the Agreements of 21 October 1971 and 18 May 1981, to Supplement the Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces with Respect to Foreign Forces Stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany, done at Bonn May 16, 1994							

Depositary – Treaty Affairs

Office of Treaty Affairs

Entered into force June 5, 1998.

In accordance with Article 2, the Agreement was subject to ratification or approval and instruments of ratification or approval of the Agreement were deposited by the signatory States with the Government of the United States of America. The Agreement entered into force thirty days after the deposit of the last instrument of ratification or approval.
Download Status List						 [460 KB]

Tags

MultilateralNorth Atlantic Treaty OrganizationTreaties

Back to Top
Summary of Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.21 
 Summary of Director Compensation 
 In 2008, the board of directors approved the following annual
compensation to directors who are not employees: 
 Cash compensation 
  


	 	•	 	 Annual retainer, paid in four equal quarterly installments, for serving as a member of the board of directors as follows: 


  

	 	•	 	 $55,000 for the chairman of the board 


  

	 	•	 	 $35,000 for all other non-employee directors 


  

	 	•	 	 A one-time “Startup Year Fixed Meeting Fee Retainer” in the amount of $15,000 per non-employee director 


  

	 	•	 	 Annual retainer, paid in four equal quarterly installments, for serving on a committee of the board of directors as follows: 


  

	 	•	 	 $20,000 for serving as the chairman of the audit committee 


  

	 	•	 	 $20,000 for serving as the chairman of the compensation committee 


  


	 	•	 	 $10,000 for serving as the chairman of the corporate governance and nominating committee 


  

	 	•	 	 $10,000 for serving as a member of the audit committee 


  

	 	•	 	 $10,000 for serving as a member of the compensation committee 


  

	 	•	 	 $5,000 for serving as a member of the corporate governance and nominating committee 


  

	 	•	 	 Reimbursement for customary and usual travel expenses 


 Stock compensation 
  

	 	•	 	 Upon the date on which a person first becomes a non-employee director, such non-employee director will receive a one-time stock option grant to purchase 60,000
shares of Macrovision common stock pursuant to the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan 


  

	 	•	 	 Upon the conclusion of our annual meeting of stockholders each year, each non-employee director, if he or she continues serving as a member of the board of
directors, will each receive an additional annual stock option grant to purchase 30,000 shares of Macrovision common stock pursuant to the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan
#### Jacob Leitner, Respondent, *v.*Max S. Boehm et al., Appellants.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the Municipal Court, second district, borough of The Bronx, New York city, in favor of plaintiff.

Friend, House & Grossman, for appellants.

Erdman, Levy *&*Mayer, for respondent.

MacLean, J.

One Solomon Marks, the assignor of the plaintiff, acting as broker for the defendants in the summer of 1898, procured a purchaser for their certain premises on One Hundred and Fifty-fourth street, at $9,500, the price named by them, whereupon an agreement of purchase and sale was entered into between the person so brought by Marks and the defendants, on -the 19th of July, 1898. For making that bargain, the broker was entitled, as admitted, to a commission of 1 per cent, upon the price, or $95; but dispute arose as to the time and condition of payment, the defendants contending that instead of being entitled to his commission upon bringing to the vendor a person ready and willing to accept his terms, and with whom a contract was entered into, that *791both by special agreement in this case and by common custom, where property was sold as was this, with an agreement for ,a builder’s loan, the broker was only to be paid when the purchaser had earned his first payment, in this instance, when the second tier of beams was laid. To sustain their contention respecting the custom, defendants testified themselves, one from a year’s, and the other from twelve years’ experience as dealers in real estate, to such a habit in their own transactions, and to having heard of such a custom from others. For them also testified another witness as to such custom, but he admitted on cross-examination that in all of the instances of this character of which he .had known, there had been a special agreement to this effect. ¡Neither the defendants nor their witness gave evidence of anything to show the existence of a valid custom. The plaintiff’s witness and assignor denied the alleged agreement. Upon this conflict of evidence respecting the one issue in the action, the justice presiding at the trial, in submitting the ease to the jury, properly charged that if, at the time the sale was effected, there was no special agreement in respect to a commission, the verdict should be for the plaintiff for $95; but if, on the other hand, there was an agreement between Marks and the Boehms that the commission should not be payable until the second tier of beams was up, the verdict should be for the defendants. To this part of the charge, the defendants excepted, and upon that exception, principally rests their appeal. But the exception was not tenable. The like is time of the exception taken to the refusal of the justice to charge respecting the weight of evidence and to certain others taken as to the admission or rejection of evidence upon the trial.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Freedman, P. J., and Leventritt, J., concur

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
- Home
- About Us
- Leadership
- Key Topics
- Remarks and Releases
- Reports
- Events
- Careers in IOs
- Contact Us

HomeBureau of International Organization Affairs...Leadership – Bureau of International Organization Affairs

# 						Leadership – Bureau of International Organization Affairs					

6											Items									

          -  							Sison, Michele J. 						Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Organization Affairs 
          -  							McFarland, David						Principal Deputy Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Organization Affairs 
          -  							Cook, Nerissa J.						Deputy Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Organization Affairs 
          -  							Grimm, Brian M.						Deputy Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Organization Affairs 
          -  							Lipin, Ella 						Deputy Assistant Secretary Bureau of International Organization Affairs 
          -  							Lombardo, Allison						Deputy Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Organization Affairs 

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Ethics and Financial Disclosure...Ethics Pledge Waivers

# 									Ethics Pledge Waivers							

Office of the Legal Adviser

## Executive Order 13989 Ethics Pledge Waivers

        - Assistant Secretary Lee Satterfield (Accessible) [164 KB]  Assistant Secretary Lee Satterfield (Original) [3 MB]
        - Ambassador at Large Elizabeth Van Schaack (Accessible) [326 KB]
        - Ambassador Caroline Kennedy [351 KB]

Tags

FinanceLawLegal Adviser

Back to Top
#### Jacob Diehl, Respondent, *v.*Bernard Schmalacker, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the late District Court, tenth judicial district, New York city (now the Municipal Court, second district, borough of The Bronx)^, entered in favor of the plaintiff upon the verdict of a jury.

William Henry Knox, for appellant.

Harry Overington, for respondent.

MacLean, J.

In an action brought *“*for balance on contract,,s wherein the defendant pleaded a general denial, a breach of the contract and a failure to obtain the certificate required therein, the plaintiff introduced in evidence the contract, which was under seal, and whereby he undertook to “ well and sufficiently erect and finish three new buildings agreeably to the drawings and specifications made by Michael J. Garvin, and signed by the said parties and hereunto annexed, within the time aforesaid, in si good, workmanlike and substantial manner, to the satisfaction and under the direction of the said architect, to be testified by a writing or certificate under the hand of said architect.” No-certificate of any sort by the architect was produced, nor was evidence given to show that it had been applied for and refused for any reason, bad or good, or that its nonproduction had been excused or waived by the defendant. As production of such a certificate was a condition precedent to recovery, the motion made to dismiss the complaint when the plaintiff rested, should have been granted instead of denied. The same is true of the similar motion made at the conclusion of the taking of testimony, where,, *836too, the defendant had given evidence of several breaches of his contract by the plaintiff. The other objections contended for by the defendant do not now need discussion.

"The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Freedman, P. J., and Leventritt, J., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
§ 57.2205 Priority for selection of scholarship recipients. ( a ) When funds determined by the Secretary to be available for scholarship grants under this subpart are insufficient to permit the awarding of scholarships to all individuals applying therefor, the Secretary shall accord priority to eligible applicants as follows: ( 1 ) First priority for scholarship grants shall be accorded to applicants who ( i ) are from a low-income background as defined in § 57.2202 (i),
( ii ) reside in a physician shortage area and
( iii ) agree to return to such area and engage in the full-time practice of primary care. For purposes of this paragraph, an individual resides in a physician shortage area if he presently is residing in such an area or if he (or his parents) resided in such an area in the year prior to his admission to an institution of higher education.
( 2 ) Second priority shall be accorded to applicants meeting the criteria in paragraphs (a)(1) (ii) and (iii) of this section.
( 3 ) Third priority shall be accorded to applicants meeting the criterion in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
( 4 ) Fourth priority shall be accorded to other applicants.
( b ) Where there are insufficient funds available to make scholarship grants to all members of any single priority grouping enumerated in paragraph (a) of this section, the following criteria will be used to accord priority within each affected priority group: ( 1 ) Within the priority groupings specified in paragraphs (a) (1) and (2) of this section, the Secretary shall rank recipients according to the degree of the severity of shortage of physicians practicing primary care in such area. Scholarship grants shall be awarded within each priority group first to applicants within that grouping from physician shortage areas with the least favorable ratio of such physicians to the population to be served.
( 2 ) Within the priority groupings specified in paragraphs (a) (3) and (4) of this section, the Secretary shall award scholarship grants within each priority group first to applicants who agree to practice primary care in a physician shortage area with a substantial portion of migratory agricultural workers in such area; second, to applicants within that grouping who agree to practice in a physician shortage area; and third, to applicants within that grouping who agree to practice in such place or places, facility or facilities, and in such manner as the Secretary finds necessary to assure that, of the patients receiving medical care in such practice, a substantial portion will consist of persons who are migratory agricultural workers or members of their families.
§ 512.140 Rights in data and intellectual property. ( a ) CMS may— ( 1 ) Use any data obtained under §§ 512.130, 512.135, and 512.150 to evaluate and monitor the Innovation Center model; and
( 2 ) Disseminate quantitative and qualitative results and successful care management techniques, including factors associated with performance, to other providers and suppliers and to the public. Data disseminated may include patient— ( i ) De-identified results of patient experience of care and quality of life surveys, and
( ii ) De-identified measure results calculated based upon claims, medical records, and other data sources.
( b ) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, for all data that CMS confirms to be proprietary trade secret information and technology of the model participant or its downstream participants, CMS or its designee(s) will not release this data without the express written consent of the model participant or its downstream participant, unless such release is required by law.
( c ) If the model participant or its downstream participant wishes to protect any proprietary or confidential information that it submits to CMS or its designee, the model participant or its downstream participant must label or otherwise identify the information as proprietary or confidential. Such assertions are subject to review and confirmation by CMS prior to CMS' acting upon such assertions.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – March 4, 2022

# 									Public Schedule – March 4, 2022							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

March 3, 2022

*****THE DAILY PUBLIC SCHEDULE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE*****

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN**

Secretary Blinken is on travel to Belgium, Poland, Moldova, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia from March 3 – 8, 2022.  Please click here for more information.

**9:25 a.m.**Secretary Blinken meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**10:00 a.m.**Secretary Blinken participates in a NATO Ministerial Meeting in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**12:10 p.m.**Secretary Blinken participates in a NATO family photo in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**1:00 p.m.**Secretary Blinken participates in a G7 Ministerial Meeting in Brussels, Belgium.**(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**3:00 p.m.**Secretary Blinken meets with European Council President Charles Michel in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY ON ARRIVAL)**

**3:20 p.m.**Secretary Blinken takes a photo with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the European Commission Josep Borrell in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**3:30 p.m.**Secretary Blinken participates in an EU Ministerial Meeting in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**5:45 p.m.**Secretary Blinken meets with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Brussels, Belgium.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**7:15 p.m.**Secretary Blinken holds a press availability in Brussels, Belgium.**(OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)**

*The Secretary’s press availability will be livestreamed on**www.state.gov**and**www.YouTube.com/statedept**.*

**DEPUTY SECRETARY WENDY R. SHERMAN**

Deputy Secretary Sherman is on travel to Turkey, Spain, Morocco, Algeria, and Egypt from March 4 – 11, 2022.  Please click here for more information.

**DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES BRIAN P. MCKEON**

Deputy Secretary McKeon attends meetings and briefings from the Department of State.

**UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS VICTORIA J. NULAND**

**6:30 p.m.** Under Secretary Nuland attends a reception in honor of the birthday of the Emperor of Japan, in Washington, D.C.**(MEDIA DETERMINED BY HOST)**

**BRIEFING SCHEDULE**

No Department Press Briefing.

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
# OAR Box 1112 Prepped by Ryan Dugan



## Document

Number: 

# 3 ) ll-B- 2 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 2

Printed 4/16/20089:12:05AM Sheet 3 of 97 P. 1P. 2

/ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y

Offic e o fAi rQualit yPlannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

Apri l 26 , 198 5 *£lNVli» • -x^ H

l . •-•- »- MEMORANDU M SUBJECT : FROM : TO : Correspondenc e Pertainin g t o Lea dRis k Assessmen t Progra m

Joh n

## H . Hainlf ^ Ambien t Standard s Branc h(MD-12 ) Docke t Numbe r A-83-2 2 Th e attache dletter s wer e sen t t o th e si xexpert s t o b e encode dabou t dose-respons e curve s fo r lead-induce dI Q decrements . Als o attache di s a copyo f th e documen t Protoco l fo r Encodin g Judgment s Abou t Outcome s o f Experiment s t o Asses s Lead-Induce dIQ Decrements , whic hi s t o b e use d durin g th e encodin g sessions . I n addition, a memorandu mi s attache dtha t describe s th e proces s use di n developin g th e protocol . Attachment s
****

This chart presents 1997 Montana exports to the Newly IndependentStates of the former Soviet Union.  Data used to create the chart werecollected by the Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce,with further analysis by the University of Massachusetts,Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research (MISER). Formore information call BISNIS at (202) 482-4655 or visit the MISER websiteat www.umass.edu/miser.
'96 export data for Montana
'95 export data for Montana
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2



                         RALPH E. DAVIS ASSOCIATES, INC.
                     CONSULTANTS - PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
                          3555 Timmons Lane, Suite 105
                              Houston, Texas 77027
                                 (713) 622-8955







                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS


         We hereby consent to the use of our name and the reference to our
reports dated October 27, 2000 in the Form 10-K of Castle Energy Corporation for
the year ended September 30, 2000.


                                             RALPH E. DAVIS ASSOCIATES, INC.




                                              /s/ ALLEN C. BARRON
                                             ----------------------------------
                                             Allen C. Barron, P.E.
                                             Vice President






Houston, Texas
December 21, 2000
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Linda M.
Breard, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Quantum
Corporation, on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2012 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form
10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Quantum Corporation.

Date: March 8, 2013

QUANTUM CORPORATION/s/
      LINDA M. BREARDLinda M. BreardChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial
    Officer)


---
HomeRemarks and Releases – Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability...Opening Remarks to the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification Phase III Interim Review

# 									Opening Remarks to the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification Phase III Interim Review							

Remarks

Delivered on Behalf of AVC Senior Bureau Official Alexandra Bell

International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification

Virtual

December 1, 2021

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you all for attending this Heads of Delegation session of the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification’s (IPNDV) Phase III Interim Review. When we finalized the Programme of Work for Phase III in Ottawa two years ago, we had no idea that our work would be interrupted by a global pandemic the likes of which had not been seen in more than a century. But through hard work and determination, the experts who drive this partnership identified ways to continue working and making progress. Although there have been some challenges in moving to all-virtual working methods, I am very impressed with the things that this body, indeed all of you, have accomplished. In addition to continuing to meet and drafting insightful, and informative papers, you have designed and executed not one, but two tabletop exercises, all through virtual platforms. And those exercises produced real insights that went on to inform the work done subsequently.

That perseverance and don’t-quit attitude have allowed the Partnership to remain a vital and relevant element critical to advancing the state-of-the-possible in the field of nuclear disarmament verification.

Given the challenging international security environment, initiatives like the IPNDV are important to continuing to make progress on the complex issues involved with nuclear disarmament. The work done by this group does not consist of half-measures or empty gestures, but practical proposals that have been examined and tested under realistic conditions through exercises and technology demonstrations.

Today we will examine the work that has been done, spending some time this morning looking back over the first two phases of work, as well as the first two years of Phase III. This review will set the foundation for continuing our efforts during the remainder of Phase III and will inform the remainder of today’s agenda as we update the Phase III Programme of Work and chart a course for the next 3-4 years.

I thank you all very much for attending and am greatly looking forward to seeing first-hand the great work being done by the IPNDV, and to ensuring that that work continues into the future.

Thank you.

Tags

Arms Control and NonproliferationBureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability

Back to Top