alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.13


                    AMENDMENT OF MASTER SECONDMENT AGREEMENT


     This Amendment of Master Secondment Agreement ("Amendment Agreement") is

made as of the 29th day of March , 2000, by and between PF Telecom Holdings
               ----        ------
LLC, a Washington limited liability company ("PF Telecom Holdings"), and PF.Net
Corp., a Delaware corporation ("PF").

     Whereas, PF Telecom Holdings and PF entered into that certain Master
Secondment Agreement as of the 29th day of October, 1999 ("Secondment
Agreement").

     Whereas, PF desires to borrow and PF Telecom Holdings desires to loan
certain personnel in addition to those specifically identified in the Secondment
Agreement.

     Now Therefore, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the
parties hereto agree as follows.

     The Secondment Agreement is hereby amended to add the following names along
with their respective terms of employment to Exhibit A thereof:

         NAME                       TERM OF EMPLOYMENT

         Patty Hook                 Feb. 16, 2000 through Oct. 29, 2000
         Karmen Williams            Feb. 16, 2000 through Oct. 29, 2000
         Steve Mellmer              Feb. 16, 2000 through Oct. 29, 2000


     Except as amended herein, all terms of the Secondment Agreement shall
remain unmodified and in full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment Agreement to be
executed by their authorized representatives as of the day and year first above
written.

PF Telecom Holdings LLC

By: /s/John Warta
    ---------------------

Title: Managing Member
       ------------------


PF.Net Corp.


By: /s/ David L. Taylor
    ----------------------

Title: Vice President, Finance, and Chief Financial Officer
       ---------------------------------------------------
<PAGE>
                                                           EXHIBIT 10(g)
GOLDEN AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
                            SURPLUS NOTE

Golden American Life Insurance Company agrees to pay Equitable of
Iowa Companies, an Iowa corporation, the sum of $25 million
($25,000,000.00) plus interest at the rate of 8.25%  per annum from
the date hereof, December 17, 1996 until paid.  In any event, this
note will mature on December 17, 2026.

This Surplus Note and accrued interest thereon shall be subordinate
to payments due to policyholders, claimant and beneficiary claims, as
well as debts owed to all other classes of debtors of Golden American
Life Insurance Company in the event of (a) the institution of
bankruptcy, reorganization, insolvency or liquidation proceedings by
or against Golden American Life Insurance Company, or (b) the
appointment of a Trustee, receiver or other Conservator for a
substantial part of Golden American Life Insurance Company
properties.

Any payments made shall first apply to accrued interest, and the
balance of such payment shall apply to reduce the principal of this
Note.

Any payment of principal and/or interest made shall be subject to the
prior approval of the Delaware Insurance Commissioner.  If the
Commissioner has not approved payment of principal to retire the note
prior to its maturity date, the maturity date will be automatically
extended until such time as the Commissioner authorizes payment of
the final balance of principal.

Golden American Life Insurance Company hereby waives presentment and
notice of dishonor.

In witness whereof, Golden American Life Insurance Company has caused
this Note to be executed and delivered.


                                GOLDEN AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

                                By:  /s/ Terry L. Kendall
                                     ---------------------------------
                                     Terry L. Kendall, President and CEO


Attest by:


/s/ Myles R. Tashman
------------------------------
Myles R. Tashman
Executive Vice President and
General Counsel
<PAGE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, 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.

 September 16, 2016

Order 

Clerk

September 16, 2016

Rehearing No. 613

151277(93)

ROBERT ARBUCKLE, Personal Representative

of the Estate of CLIFTON M. ARBUCKLE, Plaintiff-Appellee,

SC: 151277

v COA: 310611

MCAC: 11-000043

GENERAL MOTORS, LLC,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rehearing is considered, and it is DENIED.
§ 1010.20 Requirements for registering a subdivision—Statement of Record—filing and form. ( a ) *Filing.* ( 1 ) In order to register a subdivision and receive an effective date, the developer or owner of the subdivision must file a Statement of Record with the Director by either: ( i ) U.S. Mail, to the following official address: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Interstate Land Sales Registration Program, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552; or
( ii ) Electronic means designated on the ILSA program page on the Bureau's Web site at *www.consumerfinance.gov/ .*
( 2 ) When the Statement of Record is filed, a fee in the amount set out in § 1010.35(b) must be paid in accordance with § 1010.35(a).
( b ) *Form.* ( 1 ) The Statement of Record shall be in the format specified in § 1010.100 and shall be completed in accordance with the instructions in §§ 1010.102, 1010.105 through 1010.118, 1010.200, 1010.208 through 1010.216, and 1010.219. It shall be supported by the documents required by §§ 1010.208 through 1010.216 and 1010.219. It shall include any other information or documents which the Director may require as being necessary or appropriate for the protection of purchasers.
( 2 ) The requirements relating to paper type, tabs, folding, and ordering for filings with the Bureau in § 1010.102(a), (g), and (h) do not apply if a Statement of Record is filed with the Bureau via electronic means designated on the Bureau's Web site pursuant to § 1010.20(a).
( c ) *State filings.* A Statement of Record submitted under the provisions of 12 CFR part 1010, subpart C—Certification of Substantially Equivalent State Law, shall consist of the materials designated by the Certification Agreement between the Director and the certified state in which the subdivision is located.
[76 FR 79489, Dec. 21, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 29116, May 11, 2016]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1833

JESSE G. YATES, III; MELISSA LONG YATES,

Petitioners – Appellants,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. 

(Tax Ct. No. 3685-11)

Submitted: November 19, 2013 Decided: November 21, 2013

Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse G. Yates, III, Melissa Long Yates, Appellants Pro Se. 

Carol Barthel, Randolph Lyons Hutter, Kathryn Keneally, Joan 

Iris Oppenheimer, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 

Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jesse G. Yates, III, and Melissa Long Yates appeal 

from the tax court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s 

determination of a deficiency and accuracy-related penalty with 

respect to their 2006 federal income tax liability. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the tax court. Yates v. 

Comm’r of Internal Revenue, Tax Ct. No. 3685-11 (U.S. Tax Ct. 

Mar. 28. 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
* 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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 28, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-60751 Summary Calendar

ARIF SABZALI MAREDIA, Petitioner,

versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A78 986 224

-------------------- Before JONES, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Arif Sabzali Maredia seeks review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his request for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Maredia, a native and citizen of India, asserts that he faces persecution and torture in India because he is Muslim. Under the substantial evidence standard of review, Maredia must “set forth evidence so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite elements.”No. 04-60751 -2- Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft , 303 F.3d 341, 352 (5th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Maredia has failed to meet this standard. Maredia’s claims are based primarily on anti-Muslim violence in Maredia’s home state of Gujarat in February 2002 following the burning of a train. He also points to general tension between Hindus and Muslims and some reports of persecution and torture. Although there was evidence that Gujarat officials either ignored or actively participated in the violence following the February 2002 incident, and although there is evidence of ongoing tension between Muslims and Hindus, the evidence does not compel the conclusion that Maredia suffered past persecution. Notably, the immigration judge (IJ) found Maredia’s testimony regarding alleged attempts by Hindu fundamentalists to locate him to lack credibility, a determination that is entitled to great deference.
See Efe v. Ashcroft , 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th Cir. 2002). As for a well-founded fear of future persecution, Maredia did not show that he had been or was likely to be singled out based on his Muslim beliefs, nor does the evidence compel the conclusion that there is a pattern or practice of persecution generally against Muslims sufficient to support an objectively reasonable fear that Maredia would face such persecution. See Zhao v. Gonzales , 404 F.3d 295, 307 (5th Cir. 2005). As Maredia cannot meet the standard for asylum, he likewise cannot meet theNo. 04-60751 -3- higher standard for withholding of removal. See Efe , 293 F.3d at 906. Finally, with respect to his claims under the Convention Against Torture, Maredia failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would face torture as that term is defined. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1); Efe , 293 F.3d at 907. For the foregoing reasons, we DENY the petition for review.
# Official Journal L 90/2008

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 90 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 512 April 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 90

English edition

Legislation

Volume 512 April 2008

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 291/2008 of 1 April 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 292/2008 of 1 April 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 laying down implementing rules of Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector | 3 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 293/2008 of 1 April 2008 amending Annex II to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 with regard to the national ceilings set out in that Annex | 5 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EC) No 291/2008 of 1 April 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 292/2008 of 1 April 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 laying down implementing rules of Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector

3

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 293/2008 of 1 April 2008 amending Annex II to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 with regard to the national ceilings set out in that Annex

5

| | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Commission |
| | | 2008/283/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 13 November 2007 amending Decision 2003/757/EC on the aid scheme implemented by Belgium for coordination centres established in Belgium
  (notified under document number C(2007) 5416)

   (1) | 7 |

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

DECISIONS

Commission

2008/283/EC

*

Commission Decision of 13 November 2007 amending Decision 2003/757/EC on the aid scheme implemented by Belgium for coordination centres established in Belgium
  (notified under document number C(2007) 5416)

   (1)

(notified under document number C(2007) 5416)

7

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Exhibit
10.16


 


DESCRIPTION OF

HTH MANAGER LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN


 


 


I. Purpose of the Plan


 


In May 2003, WellPoint
Health Networks Inc. (“WellPoint” or the “Company”) made a strategic minority
equity investment in Highway to Health, Inc. (“HTH”) and simultaneously entered
into certain business arrangements with HTH. 
In connection therewith, the Company was also granted options to
purchase a majority interest in and, subsequently, complete ownership of HTH on
certain specified terms during specified periods.  Dennis Mark Weinberg, Executive Vice President and Chief
Development Officer of the Company, is the Company executive responsible for
managing the Company’s on-going relationship with HTH and supervising the Company’s
investment therein.  In order to properly
incentivize Mr. Weinberg in such duties, in September 2003 the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company approved a special long-term
incentive compensation payment to Mr. Weinberg in certain circumstances.


 


II.            Incentive
Compensation Structure


 


•                  The
long-term incentive payments will be payable in cash upon occurrence of any of
the events specified below.


 


•                  Mr.
Weinberg will, in the circumstances described below, become entitled to receive
a cash payment equal to 10% of the appreciation in value of WellPoint’s current
equity interest in HTH (measured from the date of WellPoint’s initial
investment).


 


•                  Upon
a liquidity event, Mr. Weinberg will become entitled to the described cash
payment.


 


•                  For
purposes of the long-term incentive payment, a liquidity event is defined as
occurrence any of the following:


 


•                  WellPoint
exercises its option to purchase 100% of the equity securities of HTH;


•                  HTH
completes an initial public offering of its equity securities;


•                  WellPoint
sells all or substantially all of its interest in HTH to an unaffiliated third
party; or


•                  All
or substantially all of the equity securities of HTH are sold to an entity
unaffiliated with WellPoint.


 


•                  In order to receive the long-term
incentive payment, Mr. Weinberg must continue to be employed by WellPoint at
the time of the relevant liquidity event. 
However, Mr. Weinberg will become vested in the right to payment if he
is terminated without cause (using WellPoint’s standard definition as set forth
in its Officer Severance Plan) on or after January 1, 2006.


 


•                  The special long-term incentive
payment made to Mr. Weinberg will in no event exceed $2,000,000.
Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions

NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(released February 21, 2023)

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of 

Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES:

None Available

The above-listed memorandum opinions can be viewed online through the 

appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebraska.gov:

http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here:

https://www.nebraska.gov/courts/sccales/.
#### § 1206.2 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*Act* means the Federal Housing Finance Regulatory Reform Act of 2008.

*Adequately capitalized* means the adequately capitalized capital classification under 12 U.S.C. 1364 and related regulations.

*Director* means the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency or his or her designee.

*Enterprise* means the Federal National Mortgage Association or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; and “Enterprises” means, collectively, the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.

*Federal Home Loan Bank,* or *Bank,* means a Federal Home Loan Bank established under section 12 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 1432).

*FHFA* means the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

*Minimum required regulatory capital* means the highest amount of capital necessary for a Bank to comply with any of the capital requirements established by the Director and applicable to it.

*Regulated Entity* means the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, or any of the Federal Home Loan Banks.

*Surplus funds* means any amounts that are not obligated as of September 30 of the fiscal year for which the assessment was made.

*Total exposure* has the same meaning given to adjusted total assets in 12 CFR 1240.2.

*Working capital fund* means an account for amounts collected from the Regulated Entities to establish an operating reserve that is intended to provide for the payment of large or multiyear capital and operating expenditures, as well as unanticipated expenses.

[73 FR 56713, Sept. 30, 2008, as amended at 85 FR 82198, Dec. 17 2020]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Renewal of the Charter for the International Digital Economy and Telecommunication Advisory Committee (IDET)

# 									Renewal of the Charter for the International Digital Economy and Telecommunication Advisory Committee (IDET)							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

July 14, 2022

The Department of State has renewed the charter of the International Digital Economy and Telecommunication Advisory Committee for two years.

The IDET will provide views and advice to the Department of State on international policy issues related to the digital economy, digital connectivity, economic aspects of emerging digital technologies, telecommunications, and communication and information policy matters. The IDET includes members of the telecommunications industry, organizations, institutions, or entities with specific interests in the digital economy, digital connectivity, economic aspects of emerging digital technologies, and communications and information policy matters; academia; civil society; and officials of interested government agencies.

IDET meetings are generally open to the public and activities are announced in the Federal Register and by email reflectors maintained by the Department of State. For further information on IDET activities or to subscribe to IDET email notifications, please contact IDET@state.gov.

Tags

Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital PolicyOffice of the SpokespersonTechnologyTelecommunications

Back to Top
### MANDATE

THE STATE OF TEXAS

TO THE 348TH DISTRIC T COURT OF TARRANT C OUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District o f Texas on August 27, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Federal National Mortgage Association, Appellant

V.

Summit Residential Services, LLC, as Trustee for The Hobby Falcon 2212 Land Trust, Appellee

No. 04

- 13

- 00775

- CV and Tr. Ct. No. 348

- 263863

- 13

was determined, and therein our said Court of Appeals made its order in these words:



## In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

We ORDER that Summit Residential Serv ices, LLC, as Trustee for The Hobby Falcon 2212 Land Trust, recover its costs of this appeal from Federal National Mortgage Association.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas, with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on February 3, 2015

.
KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLE RK

____________________________ Cynthia A. Martinez Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853BILL OF COSTS



### TEXAS COURT OF APPE ALS, FOURTH DISTRICT, AT SAN ANTONIO

No. 04

- 13

- 00775

- CV

Federal National Mortgage Association

v.

Summit Residential Services, LLC, as Trustee for The Hobby Falcon 2212 Land Trust

(NO. 348

- 263863

- 13 IN 348TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COU NTY)

TYPE OF FEE CH ARGES PAID BY MOTION FEE CLERK'S RECORD MOTION FEE FILING FEE PAID TO C OURT THAT TRANSFERRED CAS E $10.00 $30.00 $10.00

$195.00 E

- PAID PAID E

- PAID

PAID KENNETH HARTER FEDERAL NAT'L MORTG ASSOC KIMBERLY HILL

Balance of costs owing to the Fourth Court o f Appeals, San Antonio, Texas: 0.00

**Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.**

I, KEITH E. HOTTLE , CLERK OF THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a t rue and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for the Fourth District of Texas, this February 3, 2015

.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

____________________________ Cynt hia A. Martinez Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853