alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.13(c)



 
Exhibit 10.13(c)

 
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT
(this “Amendment”) is made as of this 30th day of April, 2003 to that certain AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of May 15, 2002 (the “Employment Agreement”), by and between CHARLES D. FRAZER
(“Employee”) and JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC. (“Employer”). 
 
FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Employer and Employee, being the sole parties to the Employment Agreement, hereby amend the Employment
Agreement as follows: 
 
1. Subject to earlier
termination otherwise set forth in the Employment Agreement, the last day of the Employment Period shall be January 31, 2005. 
 
2. Effective March 3, 2003, Employee’s Base Salary shall be $185,000. 
 
Except as specifically amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect
according to its terms. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the remainder of the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control and prevail. Capitalized terms used but not defined
herein shall have those respective meanings attributed to them in the Employment Agreement. This Amendment shall hereafter be deemed a part of the Employment Agreement for all purposes. 
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.

 

	 JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.
	 	 	 	 
	
	 By:
	 	 /s/ ROBERT N. WILDRICK
        

	 	 	 	 	 	         /s/ CHARLES D.
FRAZER


	 	 	 Robert N. Wildrick
	 	 	 	 	 	 CHARLES D. FRAZER

	 	 	 Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 10.10

                                Billy Dead, Inc.
                                2312 Lorenzo Dr.
                          Los Angeles, California 90068

                             As of December 1, 2002
Ms. Julie Lynn 2312 Lorenzo Dr.
Los Angeles, California 90068
Attention: Ms. Julie Lynn

Dear Ms. Lynn:

      In consideration for your agreement to pay Billy Dead, Inc. (the
"Company") the sum of $30.00, we have issued to you 15 shares of its common
stock. We anticipate changing the Company's capitalization by amending our
certificate of incorporation (the "Amendment"), as a result of which the 15
shares you currently hold will be automatically converted, without any action on
your part, into 30,000 shares (the "Shares") of the Company's Common Stock, par
value $0.001 per share.

            We have agreed that if you resign as a director of the Company, for
any reason or are removed by the stockholders for cause prior to the successful
completion of the Company's initial public offering and the sale of the
securities registered in connection with such offering (the "IPO"), the Company
will have the right to repurchase all of the Shares for an aggregate price of
$30 ($0.001 per Share, or $2.00 per share if the Amendment not yet been filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State), provided that such right is exercised by
the Company prior to the completion of the IPO. If you cease to be a director of
the Company, as provided in the first sentence of this paragraph, within one
year following the successful completion of the IPO, the Company will have the
right to repurchase 75% of the Shares, at a price of $0.001 per Share (as
adjusted for stock splits, recapitalizations or the like) provided that such
right is exercised by the Company prior such first anniversary. If you cease to
be a director of the Company, as provided in the first sentence of this
paragraph, after the first anniversary of the completion of the IPO but before
the second anniversary, the Company will have the right to repurchase 50% of the
Shares, at a price of $0.001 per Share (as adjusted for stock splits,
recapitalizations or the like), provided that such right is exercised by the
Company prior to such second anniversary. After the second anniversary of the
successful completion of the IPO, the Company will no longer have any right to
repurchase any of the Shares.

            Any certificates representing the Shares may have a restrictive
legend to such effect reflecting the rights of the Company to repurchase the
Shares.

            If the following accurately reflects our agreement, please sign
below where indicated and return a copy to us at your earliest convenience.

                              Very truly yours,
                              BILLY DEAD, INC.


                              /s/ CHARLES F. RYAN III
                              ---------------------------------------------
                              (Charles F. Ryan III)
                              President and Chief Executive Officer
ACCEPTED AND AGREED:


/s/ JULIE LYNN
-----------------------------
    (Julie Lynn)


                                     II-95
§ 1261.601 Scope of subpart. ( a ) *Coverage.* This subpart applies to agencies and employees as defined in § 1261.602.
( b ) *Applicability.* This subpart and 5 U.S.C. 5514 apply in recovering certain prejudgment debts by administrative offset except where the employee consents to the recovery, from the current pay account of an employee. Because it is an administrative offset, debt collection procedures for salary offset which are not specified in 5 U.S.C. 5514 and this subpart should be consistent with subpart 1261.5. ( 1 ) *Excluded debts or claims.* The procedures contained in this subpart do not apply to debts or claims arising under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended (26 U.S.C. 1 *et seq.*), the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 301 *et seq.*), or the tariff laws of the United States; or to any case where collection of a debt by salary offset is explicitly provided for or prohibited by another statute (e.g., travel advances in 5 U.S.C. 5705, employee training expenses in 5 U.S.C. 4108, and debts determined by a court as provided in 5 U.S.C. 5514 *note*).
( 2 ) *Waiver requests and claims to the Government Accountability Office.* This subpart does not preclude an employee from requesting waiver of a salary overpayment under 5 U.S.C. 5584, 10 U.S.C. 2774, or 32 U.S.C. 716, or in any way questioning the amount or validity of a debt by submitting a subsequent claim to the Government Accountability Office in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Government Accountability Office. Similarly, in the case of other types of debts, it does not preclude an employee from requesting waiver, if waiver is available under any statutory provision pertaining to the particular debt being collected.
[52 FR 19487, May 26, 1987, as amended at 82 FR 29387, June 29, 2017]
PUBLIC LAW 114–96—DEC. 11, 2015 129 STAT. 2193 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2250: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 114–110 (Comm. on Appropriations). 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 114–64 (Comm. on Appropriations). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015): 

May 19, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 10, considered and passed Senate, amended. 

Dec. 11, House concurred in Senate amendments. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–96 

114th Congress 

An Act 

Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 114–53) is 

amended by striking the date specified in section 106(3) and 

inserting ‘‘December 16, 2015’’. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016’’. 

Approved December 11, 2015. 

Ante, p. 506. 

Further 

Continuing 

Appropriations 

Act, 2016. 

Dec. 11, 2015 

[H.R. 2250] 


ccoleman on DSK8P6SHH1 with PUBLAWLAW
§ 161.307 Comment by interested parties. ( a ) Each applicant proposing a restriction shall establish a public docket or similar method for receiving and considering comments, and shall make comments available for inspection by interested parties upon request. Comments must be retained as long as the restriction is in effect.
( b ) Each applicant shall submit to the FAA a summary of any comments received. Upon request by the FAA, the applicant shall submit copies of the comments.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


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


§
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Quarterly Report of Lakeland Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for
the period ended July 31, 2010 (the “Report”), I, Gary Pokrassa, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:





(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.





September
      14, 2010
              /s/ Gary PokrassaGary
      Pokrassa,Chief
      Financial Officer
§ 141.79 Flight training. ( a ) No person other than a certificated flight instructor or commercial pilot with a lighter-than-air rating who has the ratings and the minimum qualifications specified in the approved training course outline may give a student flight training under an approved course of training.
( b ) No student pilot may be authorized to start a solo practice flight from an airport until the flight has been approved by a certificated flight instructor or commercial pilot with a lighter-than-air rating who is present at that airport.
( c ) Each chief instructor and assistant chief instructor assigned to a training course must complete, at least once every 12 calendar months, an approved syllabus of training consisting of ground or flight training, or both, or an approved flight instructor refresher course.
( d ) Each certificated flight instructor or commercial pilot with a lighter-than-air rating who is assigned to a flight training course must satisfactorily complete the following tasks, which must be administered by the school's chief instructor, assistant chief instructor, or check instructor: ( 1 ) Prior to receiving authorization to train students in a flight training course, must— ( i ) Accomplish a review of and receive a briefing on the objectives and standards of that training course; and
( ii ) Accomplish an initial proficiency check in each make and model of aircraft used in that training course in which that person provides training; and
( 2 ) Every 12 calendar months after the month in which the person last complied with the requirements of paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, accomplish a recurrent proficiency check in one of the aircraft in which the person trains students.
[Doc. No. 25910, 62 FR 16347, Apr. 4, 1997; Amdt. 141-9, 62 FR 40908, July 30, 1997]
(LOGO)
ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Suite 4300
370- 17th Street
Denver, Colorado 80202-5663

Phone: 303 534 4300
Fax:     303 434 6750

Report on Management's Assertion on Compliance with Minimum Servicing Standards
              Set Forth in the Uniform Single Attestation Program
                              for Mortgage Bankers

Report of Independent Accountants

Board of Directors
Aurora Loan Services Inc.

We have examined  management's  assertion,  included in the accompanying  report
titled Report of  Management,  that Aurora Loan  Services  Inc. (the  "Company")
complied with the minimum servicing  standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers
("USAP") during the year ended November 30, 1998.  Management is responsible for
the Company's  compliance  with those  requirements.  Our  responsibility  is to
express an opinion on  management's  assertions  about the Company's  compliance
based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about the Company's compliance with those
requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered  necessary in
the circumstances.  We believe that our examination  provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal  determination on the
Company's compliance with specified requirements.

In our  opinion,  management's  assertion  that the  Company  complied  with the
aforementioned  requirements  during the year ended November 30, 1998, is fairly
stated, in all material respects.

ERNST & YOUNG LLP

February 12,1999
**EXHIBIT
        23.1**
 
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 
 We
        hereby
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
        on Form
        S-8 (Nos. 333-56496 and 333-99181) of our report dated March 14, 2006 relating
        to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule
        as of
        December 31, 2005 and 2004 and for each of the two years in the period ended
        December 31, 2005 of CoSine Communications, Inc. included in this Annual
        Report
        on Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 /s/
        Burr,
        Pilger & Mayer LLP
 
 Palo
        Alto, California
 March
        24,
        2006
**Important legal notice**

*|*

# 12004V042

**Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe - PART I - TITLE V — EXERCISE OF UNION COMPETENCE - CHAPTER II — SPECIFIC PROVISIONS - Article I-42***Official Journal 310 , 16/12/2004 P. 0032 - 0032*

Article I-42

Specific provisions relating to the area of freedom, security and justice

1. The Union shall constitute an area of freedom, security and justice:

(a) by adopting European laws and framework laws intended, where necessary, to approximate laws and regulations of the Member States in the areas referred to in Part III;

(b) by promoting mutual confidence between the competent authorities of the Member States, in particular on the basis of mutual recognition of judicial and extrajudicial decisions;

(c) by operational cooperation between the competent authorities of the Member States, including the police, customs and other services specialising in the prevention and detection of criminal offences.

2. National Parliaments may, within the framework of the area of freedom, security and justice, participate in the evaluation mechanisms provided for in Article III-260. They shall be involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust's activities in accordance with Articles III-276 and III-273.

3. Member States shall have a right of initiative in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, in accordance with Article III-264.

--------------------------------------------------
§ 1212.204 Fees. ( a ) Fees will not be charged for: ( 1 ) Search for a retrieval of the requesting individual's records;
( 2 ) Review of the records;
( 3 ) Making a copy of a record when it is a necessary part of the process of making the record available for review;
( 4 ) Transportation of the record(s);
( 5 ) Making a copy of an amended record to provide evidence of the amendment; or
( 6 ) Copies of records if this is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.
( b ) Fees for the hard-copy duplication of records will be assessed in accordance with § 1206.700(a) of this chapter.
( c ) Where it appears that duplication fees chargeable under this section will exceed $25, the requester shall be provided an estimate of the fees before copies are made. Where possible, the requester will be afforded the opportunity to confer with Agency personnel in a manner which will reduce the fees, yet still meet the needs of the requester.
( d ) Where the anticipated fee chargeable under this section exceeds $25, an advance deposit of part or all of the anticipated fee may be required.
[NASA-21-091, 57 FR 4928, Feb. 11, 1992, as amended by NASA-2021-0007, 88 FR 12149, Feb. 27, 2023]
II 

Calendar No. 564 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3769 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2004 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 7, 2004 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 137 East Young High Pike in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Ben Atchley Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 137 East Young High Pike in Knoxville, Ten6 nessee, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ben 

7 Atchley Post Office Building’’. 
2 

•HR 3769 RS 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Ben Atchley Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 564 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3769 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Ben Atchley al Service located at 137 East Young High Pike 

JUNE 7, 2004 

Reported without amendment
(LOGO)
BROOKS LODDEN P.C.
certified public accountants

Charles C. Brooks, III, CPA
Telford A. Lodden, CPA, CFP, CVA
James E. Benbow, CPA
Bruce X. Hartley,  CPA
John E. Lamal, CPA

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT

To the Board of Directors
Brenton Mortgages, Inc.
Des Moines, Iowa

We  have  examined  management's  assertion  about  Brenton  Mortgages,   Inc.'s
compliance  with the minimum  servicing  standards  identified  in the  Mortgage
Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers  (USAP) as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1998  included in the
accompanying  management  assertion.   Management  is  responsible  for  Brenton
Mortgages,  Inc.'s  compliance  with  those  minimum  servicing  standards.  Our
responsibility  is to express an opinion  on  management's  assertion  about the
entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about Brenton Mortgages,  Inc.'s compliance
with the minimum servicing  standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered  necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination on Brenton  Mortgages,  Inc.'s  compliance with the minimum
servicing standards.

In our opinion,  management's  assertion that Brenton  Mortgages,  Inc. complied
with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended
December 31, 1998 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

BROOKS LODDEN P.C.

West Des Moines, Iowa
January 8, 1999

1441 29th Street, Suite 305 * West Des Moines, Iowa 50266 * Phone 515.223.7300 *
Fax: 515.223.8778
§ 158.31 Duration of authority to impose a PFC after project implementation. A public agency that has begun implementing an approved project may impose a PFC until— ( a ) The charge expiration date is reached;
( b ) The total PFC revenue collected plus interest earned thereon equals the allowable cost of the approved project;
( c ) The authority to collect the PFC is terminated by the Administrator under subpart E of this part; or
( d ) The public agency is determined by the Administrator to be in violation of 49 U.S.C. 47524 and 47526, and the authority to collect the PFC is terminated under that statute's implementing regulations under this title.
[Doc. No. 26385, 56 FR 24278, May 29, 1991, as amended by Amdt. 158-2, 65 FR 34542, May 30, 2000; Amdt. 158-4, 72 FR 28849, May 23, 2007]
---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---





---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---



---
#### Richard Monroe SIMS *v.*STATE of Arkansas

5819

491 S.W. 2d 583

Opinion delivered March 5, 1973

*1120
      *Howard, Howard <¿r Howard,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Frank B. Newell,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

According to the State’s proof, four men, one of whom was armed with a pistol, robbed the Rosedale Drug Store in Little Rock on January 24, 1972. Two of the men, Tommy Stacker and the appellant Sims, were tried jointly. Sims was found guilty and, as a habitual offender, was sentenced to 21 years imprisonment. A mistrial was declared with respect to Stacker, the jury being unable to agree upon a verdict.

Sims first complains of the admission in evidence of Stacker’s confession from which all references to Sims by name had been deleted. Stacker later testified in his own defense, denying that he voluntarily signed the confession and insisting that he had no part in the robbery. For the reasons stated in *Jackson*v. *State,*253 Ark. 1116, 491 S.W. 2d 581, also decided today, there was no denial of Sims’s right to be confronted with the witnesses against him, for he unquestionably had an opportunity to cross-examine Stacker.

Upon the appellant’s second point for reversal, we cannot say that the trial judge, after having found Sims’s own confession to have been voluntary, erred in submitting the issue of voluntariness to the jury. See *Walker*v. *State,*253 Ark. 676, 488 S.W. 2d 40 (1972), and cases there cited. The court’s action was certainly not prejudicial, since it afforded Sims a second opportunity to obtain a favorable decision upon the issue of voluntariness.

*1121Finally, the State called Charles Moorman as a witness. Moorman admitted having participated in the robbery of the drug store, but he surprised the prosecution by denying that Sims and Stacker participated in the crime. Sims nevertheless complains of this question and answer, from Moorman’s testimony:

> “Q. Were these two men with you when that drug store was robbed?

> “A. No, sir; they wasn’t. I never robbed anything with those two gentlemen.”

The appellant contends that Moorman’s answer might have been construed by the jury to mean that Moorman had participated in other crimes with Sims and Stacker, but that remote possibility is far too conjectural to represent prejudicial error.

Affirmed.