alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Retention Bonus Agreement dated as of June 27, 2003



 EXHIBIT 10.3 
  
 New York Community Bancorp, Inc. 
 615
Merrick Avenue 
 Westbury, New York 11590 
  

June 27, 2003 
  
 Joseph L. Mancino 
 The Roslyn Savings Bank 
 One Jericho Plaza 
 Jericho, New York 11753-8905 
  
 Dear Joseph: 
  
 I am pleased to have this opportunity to set forth in writing certain additional information relating to your employment at New York Community Bancorp,
Inc. (the “Holding Company”) and New York Community Bank (the “Bank”) following the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) entered between the Holding
Company and Roslyn Bancorp, Inc. on this date. This letter is intended to supplement your new employment agreement with the Holding Company. 
  
 At such time as you become an employee of the Holding Company and the Bank under your new employment agreement as a result of the merger contemplated by
the Merger Agreement, you will receive a retention bonus of $2,000,000. However, if you voluntarily terminate employment prior to the completion of 365 days of employment after the Effective Time other than by reason of an “Event of
Termination” (as defined in your new employment agreement), or if you are terminated for “Just Cause” (as defined in your new employment agreement) within such 365-day period, you will immediately return to the Holding Company a
portion of the retention bonus equal to the product of (x) the retention bonus and (y) a fraction the numerator of which is the total number of days remaining in such 365-day period and the denominator of which is 365. 







 Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Merger Agreement is terminated pursuant to Article VI of the Merger
Agreement, this letter agreement will be null and void. 
  
 Please
acknowledge the foregoing in the space indicated below. 
  

	 	 	 Sincerely,

		
	 	 	 /s/ Joseph R. Ficalora


	 	 	 Joseph R. Ficalora
 President and Chief Executive Officer



  

	 Acknowledged and Agreed:

	
	 /s/ Joseph L. Mancino


	 Joseph L. Mancino


  
  

 2
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
  1.
    
    this Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2008 fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in this Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2008
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Thor Industries, Inc.
 Date: March 10, 2008
    
    /s/
    
    Wade F. B. Thompson

Wade F. B. ThompsonChairman, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer (principal executive officer)
 26
Editorial Note on Part 84
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 84 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 84.151 Harness test; minimum requirements. ( a ) ( 1 ) Shoulder straps employed on Type A supplied-air respirators shall be tested for strength of material, joints, and seams and must separately withstand a pull of 113 kg. (250 pounds) for 30 minutes without failure.
( 2 ) Belts, rings, and attachments for life lines must withstand a pull of 136 kg. (300 pounds) for 30 minutes without failure.
( 3 ) The hose shall be firmly attached to the harness so as to withstand a pull of 113 kg. (250 pounds) for 30 minutes without separating, and the hose attachments shall be arranged so that the pull or drag of the hose behind an advancing wearer does not disarrange the harness or exert pull upon the facepiece.
( 4 ) The arrangement and suitability of all harness accessories and fittings will be considered.
( b ) ( 1 ) The harness employed on Type B supplied-air respirators shall not be uncomfortable, disturbing, or interfere with the movements of the wearer.
( 2 ) The harness shall be easily adjustable to various sizes.
( 3 ) The hose shall be attached to the harness in a manner that will withstand a pull of 45 kg. (100 pounds) for 30 minutes without separating or showing signs of failure.
( 4 ) The design of the harness and attachment of the line shall permit dragging the maximum length of hose considered for approval over a concrete floor without disarranging the harness or exerting a pull on the facepiece.
( 5 ) The arrangement and suitability of all harness accessories and fittings will be considered.
( c ) The harness employed on Type C respirators shall be similar to that required on the Type B respirator, or, it may consist of a simple arrangement for attaching the hose to a part of the wearer's clothing in a practical manner that prevents a pull equivalent to dragging the maximum length of the hose over a concrete floor from exerting pull upon the respiratory-inlet covering.
( d ) Where supplied-air respirators have a rigid or partly rigid head covering, a suitable harness shall be required to assist in holding this covering in place.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – March 15, 2021

# 									Public Schedule – March 15, 2021							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

March 14, 2021

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

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN**

Secretary Blinken is on travel to Tokyo, Japan and Seoul, Republic of Korea from March 15-18, 2021. Please click here for more information.

**UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS DAVID HALE**

Under Secretary Hale attends meeting and briefings, from the Department of State.

**BRIEFING SCHEDULE**

**2:00 p.m.**Deputy Spokesperson Jalina Porter holds a telephonic press briefing.**(OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)**

****

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

§ 7.31 Requirements for transformation of an extension of protection to the United States into a U.S. application. If the International Bureau cancels an international registration in whole or in part, under Article 6(4) of the Madrid Protocol, the holder of that international registration may file a request to transform the goods and/or services to which the cancellation applies in the corresponding pending or registered extension of protection to the United States into an application under section 1 or 44 of the Act. ( a ) The holder of the international registration must file a request for transformation within three months of the date of cancellation of the international registration and include: ( 1 ) The serial number or registration number of the extension of protection to the United States;
( 2 ) The name and address of the holder of the international registration;
( 3 ) Identify the goods and/or services to be transformed, if other than all the goods and/or services that have been cancelled;
( 4 ) The application filing fee for at least one class of goods or services required by § 2.6(a)(1) of this chapter; and
( 5 ) An email address for receipt of correspondence from the Office.
( b ) If the request for transformation contains all the elements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, the extension of protection shall be transformed into an application under section 1 and/or 44 of the Act and accorded the same filing date and the same priority that was accorded to the extension of protection.
( c ) The application under section 1 and/or 44 of the Act that results from a transformed extension of protection will be examined under part 2 of this chapter.
( d ) A request for transformation that fails to contain all the elements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section will not be accepted.
[68 FR 55769, Sept. 26, 2003, as amended at 69 FR 57186, Sept. 24, 2004; 80 FR 2313, Jan. 16, 2015]
§ 1.953 Minimum amount of referrals to the Department of Justice. ( a ) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, VA shall not refer for litigation claims of less than $2,500, exclusive of interest, penalties, and administrative costs, or such other minimum amount as the Attorney General shall from time to time prescribe. The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall promptly notify referring agencies if the Attorney General changes this minimum amount.
( b ) VA shall not refer claims of less than the minimum amount prescribed by the Attorney General unless: ( 1 ) Litigation to collect such smaller claims is important to ensure compliance with VA's policies or programs;
( 2 ) The claim is being referred solely for the purpose of securing a judgment against the debtor, which will be filed as a lien against the debtor's property pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 3201 and returned to VA for enforcement; or
( 3 ) The debtor has the clear ability to pay the claim and the Government effectively can enforce payment, with due regard for the exemptions available to the debtor under State and Federal law and the judicial remedies available to the Government.
( c ) VA should consult with the Financial Litigation Staff of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, in DOJ, prior to referring claims valued at less than the minimum amount.
(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3711; 38 U.S.C. 501)
[69 FR 62200, Oct. 25, 2004]
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003.

#### § 3.1 Definitions.

For purposes of this part, the following definitions shall apply:

*Application* means a national application for patent, an international patent application that designates the United States of America, an international design application that designates the United States of America, or an application to register a trademark under section 1 or 44 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, or 15 U.S.C. 1126, unless otherwise indicated.

*Assignment* means a transfer by a party of all or part of its right, title and interest in a patent, patent application, registered mark or a mark for which an application to register has been filed.

*Document* means a document which a party requests to be recorded in the Office pursuant to § 3.11 and which affects some interest in an application, patent, or registration.

*Office* means the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

*Recorded document* means a document which has been recorded in the Office pursuant to § 3.11.

*Registration* means a trademark registration issued by the Office.

[69 FR 29878, May 26, 2004, as amended at 80 FR 17969, Apr. 2, 2015]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 496/2005

of 31 March 2005         

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 April 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 31 March 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17).

----

ANNEX

to Commission Regulation of 31 March 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

----

(1)  Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2003 (OJ L 313, 28.11.2003, p. 11). Code ‘            999            ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

PAUL JAMIL BOYD,

Petitioner

v.

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF

LUZERNE COUNTY,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 32 MM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th day of May , 2021, the Application for Leave to File Original

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18. U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Parkway Properties, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q forthe period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William R. Flatt,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, asadopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to myknowledge:

(1)       The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)       The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

|  | /s/ William R. Flatt    |
|--|-------------------------|
|  | William R. Flatt (*)    |
|  | Chief Financial Officer |
|  | November 3, 2006        |

*A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ParkwayProperties, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 493.1353 Scope.

In accordance with § 493.19(b), the moderate complexity procedures specified as PPM procedures are considered such only when personally performed by a health care provider during a patient visit in the context of a physical examination. PPM procedures are subject to the personnel requirements in §§ 493.1355 through 493.1365.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

#### § 42.103 *Inter partes* review fee.

(a) An *inter partes* review fee set forth in § 42.15(a) must accompany the petition.

(b) No filing date will be accorded to the petition until full payment is received.
#### § 17.130 Payment for treatment dependent upon preference prohibited.

No reimbursement or payment of services not previously authorized will be made when such treatment was procured through private sources in preference to available Government facilities.

[39 FR 1844, Jan. 15, 1974. Redesignated at 61 FR 21966, May 13, 1996]
§ 1.491 Confidential communications. ( a ) A court order under §§ 1.490 through 1.499 of this part may authorize disclosure of confidential communications made by a patient to a treatment program in the course of diagnosis, treatment, or referral for treatment only if: ( 1 ) The disclosure is necessary to protect against an existing threat to life or of serious bodily injury, including circumstances which constitute suspected child abuse and neglect and verbal threats against third parties;
( 2 ) The disclosure is necessary in connection with investigation or prosecution of an extremely serious crime, such as one which directly threatens loss of life or serious bodily injury, including homicide, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, or child abuse and neglect; or
( 3 ) The disclosure is in connection with litigation or an administrative proceeding in which the patient offers testimony or other evidence pertaining to the content of the confidential communications.
( b ) [Reserved]
[60 FR 63929, Dec. 13, 1995, as amended at 85 FR 64043, Oct. 9, 2020]
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10028 Conference Calendar

CARL WAYNE SIMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WILLIAM G. SMITH; ROCKY L. STEWART; R. WHITE; K.J. REAGANS, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:97-CV-211

- - - - - - - - - - August 19, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Carl Wayne Sims, Texas prisoner # 536044, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several employees of the Texas Department of Corrections, Institutional Division. Sims alleged that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs and retaliated against him for reporting his injury as the result of a dangerous condition. The district court dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state aNo. 98-10028 -2-

** Ruiz v. Estelle , 503 F. Supp. 1265 (S.D. Tex. 1980), aff'd in part and vacated in part , 679 F.2d 1115, amended in part and vacated in part , 688 F.2d 266 (5th Cir. 1982), cert. denied , 460 U.S. 1042 (1983). claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (e)(2)(B)(ii). On appeal, Sims argues that the unsafe work condition in the kitchen violates the Ruiz ** decree, that he was given a work assignment in the fields because he filed grievances, that he was wrongly exposed to a known dangerous condition in the prison kitchen, and that the Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his injured knee. We have reviewed the record and perceive no error by the district court. Sims v. Smith et al. , No. 2:97-CV0211 (N.D. Tex. December 23, 1997). The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. How ard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2

. A previous civil rights suit filed by Sims was dismissed as frivolous. Sims v. Scott et al ., USDC No. H-95-5311 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 13, 1996). The district court's dismissal of the present case and our dismissal of the appeal constitute strikes two and three against Sims for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Adepegba
v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). Because Sims has three strikes, he may not bring a civil action or appeal as a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).No. 98-10028 -3- APPEAL DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. SANCTION IMPOSED UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
##### 



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 Sentex Sensing Technology, Inc.,
(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, William R. Sprow, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U. S. C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act 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 results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ William R. Sprow

William R. Sprow
Chief Financial Officer
April 17, 2003

14