alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4535 

To authorize the President to award the Medal of Honor to Waverly B. 

Woodson, Jr., for acts of valor during World War II. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. CARDIN, Ms. HARRIS, and 

Mr. BOOKER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the President to award the Medal of Honor 

to Waverly B. Woodson, Jr., for acts of valor during 

World War II. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION FOR AWARD OF THE MEDAL 

4 OF HONOR TO WAVERLY B. WOODSON, JR., 

5 FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING WORLD WAR II. 

6 (a) WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—Notwith7 standing the time limitations specified in section 7274 of 

8 title 10, United States Code, or any other time limitation 

9 with respect to the awarding of certain medals to persons 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4535 IS

1 who served in the Armed Forces, the President may award 

2 the Medal of Honor under section 7271 of such title to 

3 Waverly B. Woodson, Jr., for the acts of valor during 

4 World War II described in subsection (b). 

5 (b) ACTS OF VALOR DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor 

6 referred to in subsection (a) are the actions of Waverly 

7 B. Woodson, Jr., on June 6, 1944, at Omaha Beach when, 

8 as a Corporal in the 320th Barrage Balloon Battalion, he 

9 saved the lives of dozens, if not hundreds, of his fellow 

10 soldiers over the course of 30 hours, despite being struck 

11 by shrapnel while aboard his Landing Craft Tank and 

12 wounded in his groin and back, actions for which the his13 torical record indicates General John C.H. Lee rec14 ommended Corporal Woodson be awarded the Medal of 

15 Honor. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**DENNIS LEE WEAVER,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PERRY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA,** 

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 99 MM 2016** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 26th day of September, 2016, the Application f or Leave to File** 

**Original Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and the Moti on** 

**for Appointment of Counsel are** DENIED

**.**
Exhibit 10.33


 


AMENDMENT TO
SEVERANCE PAY AND CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT


 


HEALTH CARE INSURANCE


Bette
J. Floray


 


This Amendment to Severance Pay and Change in Control Agreements dated
as of June 25, 2002, is made by and between PACIFIC NORTHWEST BANCORP and
its subsidiary, PACIFIC NORTHWEST BANK (individually and collectively referred
to as “Company”), and the undersigned executive vice president of the Company (“Executive”), who agree as follows:


 


1.             The
Severance Pay Agreement and the Change in Control Agreement  (individually and collectively, the
“Severance/Change in Control Agreements”) previously entered into by Bank or
its predecessor with Executive are hereby supplemented and amended to include
the following provision with respect to health care insurance coverage:


 


In
addition to any Severance Pay and Change in Control payments due to Executive
pursuant to the Severance/Change in Control Agreements, Company shall pay all premiums for the continuation of health care
coverage benefits to Executive and his or her covered spouse and dependents
pursuant to the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) for a
period of up to eighteen (18) months after the termination of Executive’s
employment with Company or its successor
(including employment with any parent company or subsidiary under common
control with Company or its successor) provided Executive was not
terminated by such employer for cause (as defined in section 8.3 of the
Severance Pay Agreement and in section 4.4 of the Change in Control
Agreement between Company and
Executive) in the event that either: (a) a Change of Control, as defined
in section 6.2 of the Severance Pay Agreement or a Change in Control, as
defined in section 3 of the Change in Control Agreement occurs and
Executive does not continue to be employed by Company or its successor
(including employment with any parent company or subsidiary under common
control with Company or its successor) for more than thirty (30) months after
the closing of the transaction, or (b) upon the retirement of Executive
if, on the date of retirement, Executive is at least sixty (60) years of age
and has been employed by Company and/or its
successor (including employment with any parent company or subsidiary under
common control with Company or its successor) for at least five (5)
years.


 


2.             This agreement shall be binding upon the parties and
their successors, heirs and assigns. This agreement shall be governed by the
laws of the State of Washington.


 


3.             This agreement may be executed in counterparts, all of
which together shall constitute one agreement.


 


4.             Except
as expressly modified hereby, the terms and provisions of the Severance/Change
in Control Agreements shall continue and remain in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed
this agreement to be effective as of the date stated above.


 


1
Employment Agreement John Vigouroux



 
Exhibit 10.8

 
[VALICERT LETTERHEAD] 
 
February 18, 2003 
 
John Vigouroux 
25800 Vinedo Lane 
Los Altos, California 94022 
 

	 	Re:	 	Employment Agreement 

 
Dear Mr. Vigouroux: 
 
Pursuant to our recent discussions, this letter memorializes the terms of your continued employment with Valicert, Inc. (the
“Company”). 
 
1.    Salary.    Your salary is $190,000 on an annualized basis, less applicable withholding. 
 
2.    Incentive.    You will be eligible for a variable incentive plan of $160,000 on an
annualized basis, as outlined in your employment letter dated July 19, 2002. 
 
3.    Amendment of Stock Option Agreement.    Your stock option agreement shall be amended (the “Option Amendment”) to provide that immediately
prior to the consummation of the Merger (as such term is defined in the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Merger dated February 18, 2003, by and among Tumbleweed Communications Corp. (“Tumbleweed”), Velocity Acquisition Sub, Inc.
and the Company (the “Merger Agreement”)), all unvested options held by you shall become fully vested, and the period of time in which you may exercise his options shall be extended to two (2) years after your termination. A copy of the
Option Amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 
 
4.    Entire Agreement.    This Agreement, including the attached exhibit, constitutes the entire agreement between you and the Company relating to the specific subject matter hereof and
supersedes prior negotiations, representations or agreements between you and the Company. 
 
5.    Modification.    This Agreement may only be modified or amended by a supplemental written agreement signed by you, an authorized representative of
Tumbleweed and an authorized representative of the Company. 
 
6.    Termination.    If the Merger (as such term is defined in the Merger Agreement) is terminated and not consummated by the parties thereto, this Agreement shall immediately
terminate, and the Company shall not be obligated to confer any of the benefits described in paragraph 2 above. This Agreement shall terminate upon consummation of the Merger (as such term is defined in the Merger Agreement). In the event that the
Merger does not occur, the terms your employment shall be governed by terms stated in your offer letter dated July 19, 2002. 
 
I agree that there is no other compensation or benefits in any form to which I am entitled from the Company. 







 
Please sign
and date this letter on the space provided below to acknowledge your acceptance of the terms of this Agreement. 
 

	 Sincerely,

	
	 /s/    TIMOTHY CONLEY


	 Timothy Conley
 Chief Financial Officer


 
I agree
to and accept continued employment with Valicert, Inc. on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 
 

	 Date:    
	 	 2/18/03

	 	 	 	 /s/    JOHN VIGOUROUX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0107

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

SHANE THOMPSON FREIBURG, 

Defendant and Appellant, 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s unopposed motion for extension 

of time, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 28, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 28 2023

08/28/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0107
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

July 13, 2011

Before

RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge

JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

No. 10-1304

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

LAWRENCE TAYLOR, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Indiana,

South Bend Division

No. 10-1304

Hon. Robert L. Miller, Jr.,

Judge.

O R D E R

Lawrence Taylor pleaded guilty to bank robbery in 2009, which subjected him to

sentences both for the instant robbery, and for violating his supervised release in connection

with a prior bank robbery. We ordered a limited remand because the district court did not

clearly appreciate or exercise its discretion in making Taylor’s two sentences consecutive

instead of concurrent. The district court has responded, clarifying that it did understand at the

time of sentencing that it could make the sentences concurrent or consecutive, and enumerating

several convincing reasons for imposing the sentences consecutively. We invited the parties

to respond, and Taylor’s counsel supplied a response stating that in view of the district court’s

memorandum, he perceived no non-frivolous argument against the sentencing package. 

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

 Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 10-1403 Page 2

Counsel nevertheless requested that Taylor be allowed an additional 30 days to research the

issue himself. We never formally granted that request, but nevertheless, well over 30 days have

passed with no response from Taylor forthcoming. Moreover, we agree with defense counsel

that the district court’s memorandum shows that the district court appreciated its discretion

and exercised it appropriately. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                        THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                              CONTESSA CORPORATION


      Contessa  Corporation,  a corporation  organized and existing under and by

virtue  of  the  General   Corporation   Law  of  the  State  of  Delaware  (the

"Corporation"), does hereby certify as follows:

      FIRST:    That the Certificate of  Incorporation  of the  Corporation  was
      -----
originally  filed with the Office of the  Secretary  of the State of Delaware on
March 7, 1996 (the "Certificate").

      SECOND:  That Article FIRST of the  Certificate is hereby amended to read,
      ------
in its entirety, as follows:

            "FIRST:  The name of the Corporation is Fullcomm Technologies, Inc."
               -----

      THIRD:   That the  aforesaid  amendment  was duly  adopted by the Board of
      -----
Directors  and the  stockholders  of the  Corporation  in  accordance  with  the
provisions  of  Section  242 of the  General  Corporation  Law of the  State  of
Delaware.

                                   * * * * * *



<PAGE>

      IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  Corporation  has  caused  this  Certificate  of
Amendment to the  Certificate  to be signed by its duly elected Chief  Executive
Officer on this  20  day of June, 2000.
                ----

                                       By: /s/ Howard M. Weinstein
                                           ------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Howard M. Weinstein
                                       Title: Chief Executive Officer
§ 450.151 Work shift and rest requirements. ( a ) *General.* For any launch or reentry, an operator must document and implement rest requirements that ensure safety-critical personnel are physically and mentally capable of performing all assigned tasks.
( b ) *Work shifts and deviation approval process.* An operator's rest requirements must address the following: ( 1 ) Duration of each work shift and the process for extending this shift, including the maximum allowable length of any extension;
( 2 ) Number of consecutive work shift days allowed before rest is required;
( 3 ) Minimum rest period required— ( i ) Between each work shift, including the period of rest required immediately before the flight countdown work shift; and
( ii ) After the maximum number of work shift days allowed; and
( 4 ) Approval process for any deviation from the rest requirements.
( c ) *Application requirement.* An applicant must submit rest rules that demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section.
#### § 29.1391 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of forward and rear position lights.

Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:

| Dihedral angle (light included) | Angle from right or left of longitudinal axis, measured from dead ahead | Intensity (candles) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| *L* and *R* (forward red and green) | 0° to 10° 10° to 20° 20° to 110° | 40 30 5 |
| *A* (rear white) | 110° to 180° | 20 |
[No. 48521-1-I.

Division One.

October 21, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Richard Alford, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 00-1-07163-5, Douglas D. McBroom, J., entered April 14, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
§ 450.109 Flight hazard analysis. ( a ) *Applicability.* This section applies to the use of a flight hazard analysis as a hazard control strategy to derive hazard controls for the flight, or phase of flight, of a launch or reentry vehicle. Hazards associated with computing systems and software are further addressed in § 450.141.
( b ) *Analysis.* A flight hazard analysis must identify, describe, and analyze all reasonably foreseeable hazards to public safety resulting from the flight of a launch or reentry vehicle. Each flight hazard analysis must— ( 1 ) Identify all reasonably foreseeable hazards, and the corresponding failure mode for each hazard, associated with the launch or reentry system relevant to public safety, including those resulting from: ( i ) Vehicle operation, including staging and release;
( ii ) System, subsystem, and component failures or faults;
( iii ) Software operations;
( iv ) Environmental conditions;
( v ) Human factors;
( vi ) Design inadequacies;
( vii ) Procedure deficiencies;
( viii ) Functional and physical interfaces between subsystems, including any vehicle payload;
( ix ) Reuse of components or systems; and
( x ) Interactions of any of the above.
( 2 ) Assess each hazard's likelihood and severity.
( 3 ) Ensure that the likelihood of any hazardous condition that may cause death or serious injury to the public is extremely remote.
( 4 ) Identify and describe the risk elimination and mitigation measures required to satisfy paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
( 5 ) Document that the risk elimination and mitigation measures achieve the risk level of paragraph (b)(3) of this section through validation and verification. Verification includes: ( i ) Analysis;
( ii ) Test;
( iii ) Demonstration; or
( iv ) Inspection.
( c ) *New Hazards.* An operator must establish and document the criteria and techniques for identifying new hazards throughout the lifecycle of the launch or reentry system.
( d ) *Completeness Prior to Flight.* For every launch or reentry, the flight hazard analysis must be complete and all hazards must be mitigated to an acceptable level in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
( e ) *Updates.* An operator must continually update the flight hazard analysis throughout the lifecycle of the launch or reentry system.
( f ) *Application requirements.* An applicant must submit in its application the following: ( 1 ) Flight hazard analysis products of paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section, including data that verifies the risk elimination and mitigation measures resulting from the applicant's flight hazard analyses required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section; and
( 2 ) The criteria and techniques for identifying new hazards throughout the lifecycle of the launch or reentry system as required by paragraph (c) of this section.
* Pursuant to 5 T H 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. 97-30558

_____________________

GRUPO NOVA SA, United States of America for the use and benefit of, Plaintiff - Appellant-Cross-Appellee,

versus
CONTRATOS Y MANTENIMIENTOS, SA; ASSA COMPANIA GENERAL DE SEGUROS, SA, Defendants - Appellees-Cross-Appellants.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Louisiana

(96-CV-1630)

_________________________________________________________________ February 11, 1998 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * All parties to this action represented to the district court
that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this matter and
that the Eastern District of Louisiana was an improper venue in which to litigate the case; in short, the parties effectively represented to the court that there was no case or controversy2

before it. Based on this representation, the district court
dismissed the case for want of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, all parties now contend that the district court possessed subject matter jurisdiction and that the dismissal was improper.

We refuse to allow the parties to assign error to the district

court when that c ourt entered the order of dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the parties’ stated position.

We note that a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is
without prejudice, allowing this action to be filed in a proper
forum. For these reasons, the order of the district court dismissing this case is

A F F I R M E D.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                          Page 1

                               STATE OF DELAWARE
                        OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE
                        ________________________________

     I, EDWARD J. FREEL, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY OF "RENAISSANCE MEDIA LLC", FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON THE
TWENTY-FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, A.D. 1997 AT 9 O'CLOCK A.M.




                                     (Seal)




                                          /s/ Edward J. Freel
                             (Seal)       ___________________________________
                                          EDWARD J. FREEL, SECRETARY OF STATE


                                      E-3
<PAGE>   2
                            CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION

                                       OF

                             RENAISSANCE MEDIA LLC


     This Certificate of Formation of Renaissance Media LLC (the "COMPANY"),
dated, November 24, 1997 is being duly executed and filed by Morgan Stanley
Capital Partners III, Inc., as an authorized person, to form a limited
liability company under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (6 Del C,
section 18-101, et seq.).

     FIRST. The name of the limited liability company formed hereby is
Renaissance Media LLC.

     SECOND. The address of the registered office of the Company in the State
of Delaware is c/o Corporation Service Company, 1013 Centre Road, City of
Wilmington, County of New Castle, Delaware 19805.

     THIRD. The name and address of the registered agent for service of process
on the Company in the State of Delaware is Corporation Service Company, 1013
Centre Road, City of Wilmington, County of New Castle, Delaware 19805.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate of
Formation as of the date first above written.

                                   MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL PARTNERS III, INC.


                                   By: /s/ Lawrence B. Sorrel
                                       ------------------------
                                       Name: Lawrence B. Sorrel
                                       Title: Managing Director




                                      E-4
#### Andrew Leach, Appellant, *versus*Lincoln Drake *et al.*

Under *St,*1817, *c,*190, § 7, which requires that a bond for the prosecution of an appeal from the Court of Probate shall be M given and filed in the probate office by the appellant,” it was *held,*that a bond executed and filed by a stranger, conditioned that the appellant should prosecute, was insufficient. ,

Appeal from the Court of Probate. *Warren*and *Eliot,*moved that the appeal be dismissed, because a bond to prosecute it to effect, had not been *“*given and filed in the probate office by the appellant,” as required by *St.*1817, c. 190, § 7. A bond was filed, executed by Howard Lothrop and John Torrey, conditioned that the appellant should prosecute the appeal, but it was not given in his name, nor did it appear that Lothrop and Torrey were his attorneys, nor did they profess to bind him, but themselves ; and the Court *held*that the bond was not in compliance with the statute, and dismissed the appeal. [By Revised Stat. c. 83, § *32 et*seq., no bond is required.]

*Coffin*and Clifford, for the appellant.