alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Form of Stock Option Grant Letter to Employees



 Exhibit 10.1 
  

	Re:	Stock Option Grant 

 In recognition of
your significant responsibilities at Airgas, I am pleased to inform you that pursuant to the Airgas, Inc. Amended and Restated 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), effective May ##, 20## you have been granted a non-qualified stock
option (the “Option”) to purchase #,### shares of common stock, at a price of $##.## per share. 
 This Option is subject to the
applicable terms and conditions of the Plan which are incorporated herein by reference, and in the event of any contradiction, distinction or differences between this letter and the terms of the Plan, the terms of the Plan will control. Please go to
http://airnet/page.asp?7000000000610 to review the prospectus for the Plan and the Plan. 
 Subject to your continued employment with the
Company, the Option may be exercised in cumulative equal installments of 25% of the shares on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant. It shall terminate in full at 5:00 P.M. local Philadelphia, Pennsylvania time on August ##,
201#, unless sooner terminated as specified in Section 6.7 of the Plan. 
 In order to excise your vested options, you should contact
Merrill Lynch to review your account. Arrangements will be made for withholding any taxes that may be due with respect to such shares. For information about your account and to exercise options, call Merrill Lynch at
        -        -         to talk to a Participant Service Representative or visit the web site at
www.benefits.ml.com. 
 If you have not received copies of the latest Airgas Annual Report and Proxy Statement because you either do not
own Airgas shares or you do not hold other Airgas stock options, copies are attached hereto. You will be sent a new Annual Report and Proxy Statement each year as they become available to Airgas shareholders. 
 Your stock option is one of the ways you can participate in the long-term success of Airgas. I wish you much success and personal fulfillment. Thanks for
your hard work and dedication. 
 Yours truly,
ex10-1.htm


                                                                        Exhibit 10.1

                            Equity Transfer Agreement
                             (English Translation)

Party A:  Italy Baopiao (Hong Kong) Apparel Development Co., Ltd.

Address:  Tower C, No. 9 Nantian Mansion, No. 275 Beijiao Yinghuang Street, Hong
          Kong

Party B:  Hong Kong Alberta Holdings Limited

Address:  RM 42,4F, Xinxianli Mansion, No.10 Middle Circle Xuechang Street, Hong
          Kong

In consideration  of the mutual promises  contained  herein,  with regard to the
transfer of shares of Baopiao (China) Light Industry Co., Ltd., a wholly foreign
owed enterprise in China, the parties herewith agree as follows:

1.   Italy Baopiao  (Hong Kong)  Apparel  Development  Co.,  Ltd.,  the original
     investor,  agrees to transfer its 100% equity  interest in Baopiao  (China)
     Light Industry Co., Ltd., a wholly foreign owed  enterprise in China,  with
     registered capital of HKD 50 million, to the Party B. The Party B agrees to
     purchase such equity interest.

2.   Before competent  government  authorities approve the equity transfer,  the
     rights and obligations of Baopiao (China) Light Industry Co., Ltd. shall be
     handled according to the original Article of Association, and shall have no
     effect on Party B.  After  competent  government  authorities  approve  the
     equity  transfer,  the rights and  obligations  of  Baopiao  (China)  Light
     Industry Co.,  Ltd.  shall be borne by Party B, and have no effect on Party
     A.

3.   The transfer price of the equity interest is HKD 50 million.  Party B shall
     pay the transfer price to Party A within 30 days following the execution of
     this agreement.  If Party B fails to perform its  obligation,  it shall pay
     liquidated damages in the amount of 1% of the transfer price per day.

4.   This agreement is governed by the laws of People's Republic of China.


5.   Dispute resolution:  The parties shall settle disputes through negotiation.
     If  the  negotiation  fails,  the  dispute  shall  be  submitted  to  China
     International  Economic and Trade  Arbitration  Commission for arbitration.
     The arbitration award shall be final.

6.   This  agreement  shall be in five  copies.  Each party shall take one copy.
     This  agreement  shall take effect on the  execution by the two parties and
     obtaining approval from competent government authorities.

7.   This Agreement is executed in Huian, Quanzhou, on February 26, 2009.

Party A: Italy Baopiao (Hong Kong) Apparel Development Co., Ltd.
Legal representative: Li Haiting


/s/ Li Haiting
--------------------------------


Party B: Hong Kong Alberta Holdings Limited
Legal representative: Li Haiting


/s/ Li Haiting
--------------------------------

                                                               February 26, 2009
Editorial Note on Part 43
Editorial Note: For miscellaneous technical amendments to this part 43, see Amdt. 43-3, 31 FR 3336, Mar. 3, 1966, and Amdt. 43-6, 31 FR 9211, July 6, 1966.

§ 43.7 Persons authorized to approve aircraft, airframes, aircraft engines, propellers, appliances, or component parts for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration. ( a ) Except as provided in this section and § 43.17, no person, other than the Administrator, may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service after it has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.
( b ) The holder of a mechanic certificate or an inspection authorization may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.
( c ) The holder of a repair station certificate may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 145 of this chapter.
( d ) A manufacturer may approve for return to service any aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part which that manufacturer has worked on under § 43.3(j). However, except for minor alterations, the work must have been done in accordance with technical data approved by the Administrator.
( e ) The holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate issued under Part 121 or 135, may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 121 or 135 of this chapter, as applicable.
( f ) A person holding at least a private pilot certificate may approve an aircraft for return to service after performing preventive maintenance under the provisions of § 43.3(g).
( g ) The holder of a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating may approve an aircraft issued a special airworthiness certificate in light-sport category for return to service, as provided in part 65 of this chapter.
( h ) The holder of at least a sport pilot certificate may approve an aircraft owned or operated by that pilot and issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category for return to service after performing preventive maintenance under the provisions of § 43.3(g).
[Amdt. 43-23, 47 FR 41084, Sept. 16, 1982, as amended by Amdt. 43-36, 61 FR 19501, May 1, 1996; Amdt. 43-37, 66 FR 21066, Apr. 27, 2001; Amdt. 43-39, 69 FR 44863, July 27, 2004]
**Exhibit 31.2**
I, Paul E. Martin, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K ofRenaissance Media Group LLC, Renaissance Media (Louisiana)LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC and Renaissance MediaCapital Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made,not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly presentin all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrants as of, and for,the periods presented in this report; 4.  The registrants’ other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrants and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed underour supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrants,including their consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b)  [Reserved];  (c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrants’ disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (d)  Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrants’ internal control over financialreporting that occurred during theregistrants’ most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrants’ fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrants’ internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrants’ other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrants’auditors and the audit committee of the registrants’ board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 (a)  All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrants’ ability to record,process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrants’internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 31, 2005
/s/ Paul E. Martin
From: Parker Richard [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com]

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 1:08 PM

To: Wes Patterson

Cc: Rosenstock, Steven; ahofmann@publicpower. org; Brian Coffey; brian.kaja@ge.com;

bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; Bob Smith; chuck.si mmons@pgnmail.com; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov;

Michael Rivest; rgreeson@federalpacific.com; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; Nadel, Steve;

tballo@earthjustice.org

Subject: Re: DOE Negotiating Committee Meeting



### I would be interested in the Advocates take on this. Though i am naturally curious, my gut

instinct is that field trip idea is worth pursuing iff physically seei ng the unit will help us write the

specification. otherwise our incr edibly scarce time might be bette r spent on writing the spec and

the sub-standard.

Richard

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 21, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Wes Patterson < wes.patterson@us.abb.com > wrote:

Thanks Steve

Richard - is this something worth pursing?

Best regards

Wes

"Rosenstock, Steven" < SRosenstock@eei.org >

11/21/2011 09:59 AM To Wes Patterson/SouthBoston/USTRA/ABB@ABB, "Bob Smith"

< bsmith@federalpacific.com >

cc < rgreeson@federalpacific.com >, < ahofmann@publicpower.org >,

< brian.coffey@navigant.com >, < brian.kaja@ge.com >,

< bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com >, < chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com >,

< richardparkerdc@gmail.com >, < rick.anderson@faypwc.com >, "Nadel,

Steve" < snadel@aceee.org >, < tballo@earthjustice.org >,

< john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov >, < mrivest@navigant.com >

Subject RE: DOE Negotiating Committee Meeting



### PEPCO is the electric distribution company that serves Wa shington DC. I can send an

e-mail or make a call to see if they would be able to arrange a visit (however, there are

probably strict security and safety protoc ols that would have to be followed).

### Steve Rosenstock

Manager, Energy Solutions

Edison Electric Institute

srosenstock@eei.org

202-508-5465

<mime-attachment.gif>

From: Wes Patterson [ mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com ]

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 7:40 AM

To: Bob Smith

Cc: rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; ahofmann@publicpower.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ;

brian.kaja@ge.com ; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ;

richardparkerdc@gmail.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; Nadel, Steve; Rosenstock, Steven;

tballo@earthjustice.org ; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov ; mrivest@navigant.com

Subject: RE: DOE Negotiating Committee Meeting

Hi Bob

Your suggestion that we might try to have the committee look a network feeding one of our meeting

locations is quite good.

I have copied Richard and some others to see if they have an interest.

============================

Suggestion from Bob Smith:

"One stupid idea: I suppose that at least one of our next meetings will be in a building served by a network

transformer. More than likely I could get someone from the local utility to open a sidewalk vault and go over the

components in the vault needed to supply uninterruptible power to ou r building."

============================

Best regards

Wes
#### Emma V. Corning, Appellant, *v.*Prudential Insurance Company of America, Respondent.

Argued March 12, 1937;

decided April 20, 1937.

*669
      *James D. Brown, Frank J. McConnell, Karl S. Mayhew*and *Lester B. Donahue*for appellant.

*Merwin F. Le Vine*and *Solon Weit*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien. Hhbbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                   18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Douglas R. Sanderson, Chief Executive Officer of Fortune Entertainment
Corporation, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
March 31, 2005 of Fortune Entertainment Corporation;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

May 20, 2005

/s/ Douglas R. Sanderson
Douglas R. Sanderson, Chief Executive Officer
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER


      This is AMENDMENT NO. 1 dated as of January 26, 2000 (the  "Amendment") to
the AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER (the "Agreement")  dated as of November 4, 1999
by and among Eastern  Enterprises,  a Massachusetts  voluntary  association (the
"Company"),  KeySpan  Corporation,  a New York corporation  ("Parent"),  and ACJ
Acquisition LLC, a Massachusetts limited liability company which is directly and
indirectly wholly owned by the Parent ("Merger Sub").

1. The parties entered into the Agreement to provide for a business  combination
(the  "Merger")  pursuant  to which the Merger Sub would merge with and into the
Company, with the Company as the survivor of the Merger.  The purpose of
this  Amendment  is to set forth  certain  agreements  by and among the Company,
Parent and Merger Sub to amend the Agreement.  Accordingly,  the Company, Parent
and Merger Sub agree as set forth  below in this  Agreement.  Capitalized  terms
used in this  Amendment  that are not defined  herein shall have the  respective
meanings  ascribed  to them in the  Agreement.  Capitalized  terms  used in this
Amendment that are not defined in the Agreement  shall be deemed included in the
Agreement with the respective meanings ascribed to them in this Amendment.

2.  Section 4.13 of the  Agreement is hereby  amended to read in its entirety as
follows:

           Section  4.13 VOTE  REQUIRED.  The  approval  of the  Merger  AND THE
      AMENDMENT TO THE COMPANY  DECLARATION  OF TRUST TO PERMIT A  MASSACHUSETTS
      LIMITED   LIABILITY  COMPANY  OR  ANY  OTHER  COMPANY  TO  MERGE  INTO  OR
      CONSOLIDATE  WITH THE  COMPANY by a majority  of the votes  entitled to be
      cast by all holders of Company  Common Stock (the  "Company  Shareholders'
      Approval") are the only votes of the holders of any class or series of the
      capital  stock  of the  Company  or any of its  subsidiaries  required  to
      approve this Agreement, the Merger and the other transactions contemplated
      hereby.





<PAGE>


      IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  Eastern  Enterprises,  KeySpan  Corporation  and ACJ
Acquisition  LLC have caused this Amendment to be signed as a sealed  instrument
by their  duly  authorized  representative  officers,  all as of the date  first
written above.

                                   EASTERN ENTERPRISES


                                    By: /s/ J. Atwood Ives
                                        ------------------------------
                                        Title: Chief Executive Officer



                                    KEYSPAN CORPORATION


                                    By: /s/ Gerald Luterman
                                        ------------------------------
                                        Title: Senior Vice President



                                     ACJ ACQUISITION LLC


                                    By: /s/ Steven Zelkowitz
                                        ------------------------------
                                        Title: Manager
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             139
<SECURITIES>                                     4,152
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,291
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 160,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          145,591
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           525
<OTHER-SE>                                     114,669
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   160,514
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,519
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,519)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.018)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.018)


</TABLE>
Argued on rehearing July 9,

former opinion sustained September 25, 1928.

#### RUBY S. GILL *v.*DR. LAURENCE SELLING et al.

(270 Pac. 411.)

For appellant there was a brief and oral argument by *Mr. J. G. McCue.*

For respondent there was a brief over the names of *Messrs. Sewn, & Becken*and *Mr. Omar G. Spencer,*with an oral argument by *Mr. F. S. Senn.*

BELT, J.

We adhere to former opinion reversing the judgment in this action.

Former Opinion Adhered to on Rehearing.
§ 29.61 Takeoff distance: Category A. ( a ) The normal takeoff distance is the horizontal distance along the takeoff path from the start of the takeoff to the point at which the rotorcraft attains and remains at least 35 feet above the takeoff surface, attains and maintains a speed of at least VTOSS, and establishes a positive rate of climb, assuming the critical engine failure occurs at the engine failure point prior to the takeoff decision point.
( b ) For elevated heliports, the takeoff distance is the horizontal distance along the takeoff path from the start of the takeoff to the point at which the rotorcraft attains and maintains a speed of at least VTOSS and establishes a positive rate of climb, assuming the critical engine failure occurs at the engine failure point prior to the takeoff decision point.
[Doc. No. 24802, 61 FR 21899, May 10, 1996]