alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 779.314 “Goods” and “services” defined.

The term “goods” is defined in section 3(i) of the Act and has been discussed above in § 779.14. The Act, however, does not define the term “services.” The term “services,” therefore, must be given a meaning consistent with its usage in ordinary speech, with the context in which it appears and with the legislative history of the exemption as it explains the scope, the purposes and the objectives of the exemption. Although in a very general sense every business might be said to perform a service it is clear from the context and the legislative history that all business establishments are not making sales of “services” of the type contemplated in the Act; that is, services rendered by establishments which are traditionally regarded as local retail service establishments such as the restaurants, hotels, barber shops, repair shops, etc. (See §§ 779.315 through 779.320.) It is to these latter services only that the term “service” refers.
#### § 500.128 Cancellation of insurance policy or liability bond not relief from insurance requirements.

Cancellation, rescission, suspension, or any other termination of any insurance policy or liability bond required by the Act does not relieve a person who transports or causes to be transported any migrant or seasonal agricultural worker in any vehicle under

his ownership or control of the responsibility to comply with the insurance requirements specified in §§ 500.121, 500.122 and 500.123.
#### § 530.405 General.

Except as specifically provided in these regulations, the “Rules of Practice and Procedure for Administrative Hearings before the Office of Administrative Law Judges” established by the Secretary at 29 CFR part 18 shall apply to administrative proceedings described in this subpart.
ex10_1.htm


    AMENDMENT
#2

     

    to
the

     

    COMMERCIAL
SUPPLY AGREEMENT

    (originally
effective May 23, 2007)

     

    by
and between

     

    LG
DISPLAY CO., LTD. (“LGD”) - formerly named LG.PHILIPS LCD
CO., LTD.

     

    and

     

    UNIVERSAL
DISPLAY CORPORATION (“UDC”)

    


    


    This
Amendment #2 shall amend and modify, to the extent of any inconsistency, the
provisions of the above-referenced Commercial Supply Agreement, as previously
amended effective as of June 30, 2008 (the “Agreement”).  This
Amendment #2 shall be effective as of June 30, 2009.

    


    1.           Article
9.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the term of the Agreement for
six (6) additional months, through December 31, 2009.

    


    2.           Except
as set forth in this Amendment #2, all other terms and conditions of the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

    


    IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, intending to be legally bound, have caused this
Amendment #2 to be executed by their duly authorized
representatives:

    


    


    
      	
              LG
      DISPLAY CO., LTD.

            	 
      	
              UNIVERSAL
      DISPLAY CORPORATION

            
	 
      	 
      	 
      	 
      	 
      
	
              By:

            	
              /s/
      Byung Chul Ahn

            	 
      	
              By:

            	
              /s/
      Steven V. Abramson

            
	
              Name:

            	
              Byung
      Chul Ahn

            	 
      	
              Name:

            	
              Steven
      V. Abramson

            
	
              Title:

            	
              Vice
      President

            	 
      	
              Title:

            	
              President

            
	
              Date:

            	
              Aug
      5, 2009

            	 
      	
              Date:

            	
              Aug
      11, 2009
§ 500.157 Scope of agreements with State agencies. ( a ) Every agreement between the Secretary and any State agency under the authority referred to in § 500.155 of this part shall be in writing.
( b ) Any delegation to a State agency by the Secretary under such authority shall be made pursuant to approval of a written State plan submitted in accordance with § 500.159 which shall: ( 1 ) Include a description of each function to be performed, the method of performing each such function, and the resources to be devoted to the performance of each such function,
( 2 ) provide assurances satisfactory to the Secretary that the State agency will comply with its description under paragraph (b)(1) of this section and that the State agency's performance of the delegated functions will be at least comparable to the performance of such functions by the Department of Labor; and
( 3 ) contain a certification of the Attorney General of such State, or, if the Attorney General is not authorized to make such a statement, the State official who is so authorized, that an agreement pursuant to such State plan is valid under the laws of that State.
Exhibit 10.1


 


AMENDMENT TO 

THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED

ROCK CREEK PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


2008 INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN


 


THIS AMENDMENT TO THE
THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED ROCK CREEK PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 2008 INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN (this “Amendment”) is
made and adopted as of April 10, 2015 by Rock Creek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (f/k/a Star Scientific, Inc.), a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”). Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings
ascribed to them in the Plan (as defined below).


 


WHEREAS, the Company
maintains the Third Amended and Restated Rock Creek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 2008 Incentive Award Plan, as amended (the “Plan”);


 


WHEREAS, pursuant to
Section 14.1 of the Plan, the Plan may be amended by the Committee at any time and from time to time with the approval of the Board
of Directors of the Company, provided that approval by the stockholders of the Company is required for any amendment to
the Plan that increases the number of shares available under the Plan (other than certain adjustments under the Plan); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company
desires to amend the Plan as set forth herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, BE
IT RESOLVED, that, subject to approval by the stockholders of the Company, the Plan be and hereby is amended as follows:


 


1.                 
Section 3.1(a) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the number “45,200,000” in clause (i) of such Section
and substituting the number “60,200,000” in lieu thereof.


 


2.                 
This Amendment shall be and is hereby incorporated in and forms a part of the Plan.


 


3.                 
Except as set forth herein, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.


 


* * *
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 THIS
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of this 20th day of April, 2015 (the “Effective Date”), by and between MOBILE MINI, INC., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), and Mark Funk (the “Employee”). 
 RECITALS: 

WHEREAS, the Company and Employee entered into that certain Employment Agreement, dated as of October 15, 2008 (as previously amended,
the “Employment Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the parties now wish to amend the provision in the Employment Agreement
relating to the Employee’s right to severance after the occurrence of a change in control of the Company. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual agreements and covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which hereby are acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as
follows, effective as of the Effective Date: 
 1. Section 6(c) of the Employment Agreement is amended and restated to read as follows
(revisions are underlined): 
 “(c) Following a Change in Control. If within one year following the occurrence of
a Change of Control the Employee’s employment by the Company is terminated either by the Company other than for Cause, death or Disability, or by the Employee for Good Reason, then the Employee shall be entitled to the benefits provided
below (the “CiC Benefits” and together with Without Cause Benefits, the “Severance Benefits”): . . .” 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date. 
  

			
	MOBILE MINI, INC.
		
	By:		/s/ Erik Olsson
	Title:		/s/ President & CEO
	
	EMPLOYEE
	
	/s/ Mark Funk
	Mark Funk
(76 South. 413)

#### CARR v. STATE.

(4 Div. 522.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

June 12, 1917.

Rehearing Denied June 30, 1917.)

1. Arson &wkey;>37(l) — Proof of Crime — Sufficiency.

In arson, the corpus delicti consists, not alone of a building burned, but also of its having been willfully fired by some responsible person, and burning by accidental and natural causes must be satisfactorily excluded, to constitute sufficient proof of the crime.

[Ed. Note. — For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Arson.]

2. Arson <&wkey;37(l) — Evidence—Sufficiency.

In prosecution for arson, evidence *held*insufficient to prove the corpus delicti.

Appeal from GirCuit Court, Houston County ; I-I. A. Pearce, Judge.

J. D. Carr, alias Dick Carr, was convicted of arson, and appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

O. C. Doster, of Dothan, for appellant. W. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

BROWN, P. J.

[1] “In arson, the corpus delicti consists, not alone of a building burned, but also of its having been willfully fired by some responsible person. Burning by accidental and natural causes must he satisfactorily excluded, to constitute sufficient proof of the crime.” Daniels v. State, 12 Ala. App. 119, 68 South. 499; Winslow v. State, 76 Ala. 42. The fire which destroyed the building in this ease was discovered about 5 o’clock in the morning of May 5, 1916, and was then bursting through the roof of the building. The only evidence offered by the state to exclude the theory that the building was burned by accidental or. natural causes was the testimony of the witness McKnight, who, when recalled, testified: “I wasn’t there the night before. I was there once or twice a day. I had been up there on the evening of the 4th. There wasn’t any fire around there at sundown. It was pretty nearly burned up when I got there.”

There is no evidence showing whether the market was open the night before, who was in there, when they left, when the market was closed, or whether there was fire in the building at that time. ,

[2] After careful consideration of the evidence, the opinion prevails that the evidence offered by ' the state was not sufficient to prove the corpus delicti, and that the defendant was entitled to 'the affirmative charge. We find no other error in the record.

For the error pointed out, the judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

On Rehearing.

PER CURIAM.

If the building was willfully fired, the evidence pointed out in the application for rehearing has some tendency to connect the defendant with the burning; but, if the burning was from accidental causes, the circumstances pointed out lose their potency. The state should, on another trial, offer evidence overcoming or tending to overcome the presumption that the fire occurred from accidental causes. See Daniels v. State, 12 Ala. App. 119, 68 South. 499.

Application overruled.
#### § 417.10 Rights of participants.

Every interested person shall have the right to present oral or documentary evidence, to submit evidence in rebuttal, and to conduct such examination or cross-examination as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts (subject to the rulings of the Administrative Law Judge), and to object to admissions or exclusions of evidence. The Department of Labor, through its officers and attorneys shall have all rights accorded interested persons by the provisions of this subpart A.
#### § 779.515 Regulations should be consulted.

This discussion in subpart F of this part is intended only to indicate the general requirements of the recordkeeping regulations. Each employer subject to any provision of the Act should consult the regulations to determine what records he must maintain and the period for which they must be preserved.
IA 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 8 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 1, 2007 

Referred to the Committee on House Administration 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for the reappointment of Patricia Q. Stonesifer 

as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on the Board of Regents 

5 of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other than 

6 Members of Congress, occurring because of the expiration 

7 of the term of Patricia Q. Stonesifer of Washington, is 

8 filled by the reappointment of Patricia Q. Stonesifer, for 

9 a term of 6 years, effective December 22, 2007. 

Passed the Senate July 31, 2007. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
§ 531.59 The tip wage credit. ( a ) In determining compliance with the wage payment requirements of the Act, under the provisions of section 3(m)(2)(A) the amount paid to a tipped employee by an employer is increased on account of tips by an amount equal to the formula set forth in the statute (minimum wage required by section 6(a)(1) of the Act minus cash wage paid (at least $2.13)), provided that the employer satisfies all the requirements of section 3(m)(2)(A). This tip credit is in addition to any credit for board, lodging, or other facilities which may be allowable under section 3(m).
( b ) As indicated in § 531.51, the tip credit may be taken only for hours worked by the employee in an occupation in which the employee qualifies as a “tipped employee.” Pursuant to section 3(m)(2)(A), an employer is not eligible to take the tip credit unless it has informed its tipped employees in advance of the employer's use of the tip credit of the provisions of section 3(m)(2)(A) of the Act, *i.e.:* The amount of the cash wage that is to be paid to the tipped employee by the employer; the additional amount by which the wages of the tipped employee are increased on account of the tip credit claimed by the employer, which amount may not exceed the value of the tips actually received by the employee; that all tips received by the tipped employee must be retained by the employee except for a tip pooling arrangement limited to employees who customarily and regularly receive tips; and that the tip credit shall not apply to any employee who has not been informed of the requirements in this section. The credit allowed on account of tips may be less than that permitted by statute (minimum wage required by section 6(a)(1) minus the cash wage paid (at least $2.13)); it cannot be more. In order for the employer to claim the maximum tip credit, the employer must demonstrate that the employee received at least that amount in actual tips. If the employee received less than the maximum tip credit amount in tips, the employer is required to pay the balance so that the employee receives at least the minimum wage with the defined combination of wages and tips. With the exception of tips contributed to a tip pool limited to employees who customarily and regularly receive tips as described in § 531.54, section 3(m)(2)(A) also requires employers that take a tip credit to permit employees to retain all tips received by the employee.
[85 FR 86790, Dec. 30, 2020]
§ 2704.106 Allowable fees and expenses. ( a ) Awards will be based on rates customarily charged by persons engaged in the business of or acting as attorneys, agents and expert witnesses, even if the services were made available without charge or at a reduced rate to the applicant.
( b ) No award for the fee of an attorney or agent under this part may exceed $125 per hour, except as provided in § 2704.107. No award to compensate an expert witness may exceed the highest rate at which the Secretary of Labor pays expert witnesses. However, an award may also include the reasonable expenses of the attorney, agent, or witness as a separate item if the attorney, agent or witness ordinarily charges clients separately for such expenses.
( c ) In determining the reasonableness of the fee sought for an attorney, agent or expert witness, the administrative law judge shall consider the following: ( 1 ) If the attorney, agent or witness is in private practice, his or her customary fee for similar services, or, if an employee of the applicant, the fully allocated cost of the services;
( 2 ) The prevailing rate for similar services in the community in which the attorney, agent or witness ordinarily performs services;
( 3 ) The time actually spent in the representation of the applicant;
( 4 ) The time reasonably spent in light of the difficulty or complexity of the issues in the underlying proceeding; and
( 5 ) Such other factors as may bear on the value of the services provided.
( d ) The reasonable cost of any study, analysis, engineering report, test, project or similar matter prepared on behalf of a party may be awarded, to the extent that the charge for the service does not exceed the prevailing rate for similar services, and the study or other matter was necessary for preparation of the applicant's case in the underlying proceeding.
[47 FR 10001, Mar. 9, 1982, as amended at 63 FR 63176, Nov. 12, 1998; 71 FR 54905, Sept. 20, 2006]
SERVED JUNE 3, 2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

Executive Office of the State of Texas 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09SO0014 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-1045 

AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER 

Paragraph #2 of the Procedural Order is amended as follows: 

WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the 

following procedural schedule: 

... On or before August 1, 2010, the parties shall conclude all discovery 

including, but not limited to, depositions, document production, responses to 

production requests and/or interrogatories. If the parties cannot resolve a 

discovery dispute they shall submit the dispute to the undersigned for resolution 

in a timely manner... 

Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 

The court does not anticipate scheduling this case prior to 1 August 2010. 
FAA Docket No. CP09SO0014 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^30 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Michael C. Crowley, Respondent's Counsel 

Environmental Protection & Administrative 

Law Division 

P.O. Box 12548 

Austin, TX 78711 

TEL: 512-475-4202 

FAX: 512-474-1062 

Gerald A. Ellis, Complainant's Counsel 

Southern Region, ASO-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor 

Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202 366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^30.
§ 4903.12 How will PBGC use tax refund offset to collect a debt owed to PBGC? ( a ) *Tax refund offset.* In most cases, the Financial Management Service uses the Treasury Offset Program to collect debts owed to PBGC by the offset of tax refunds and other Federal payments. *See* § 4903.10(c) of this part. If not already transferred to the Financial Management Service under § 4903.10 of this part, PBGC will refer to the Treasury Offset Program any past-due, legally enforceable debt for collection by tax refund offset. *See* 26 U.S.C. 6402(d), 31 U.S.C. 3720A and 31 CFR 285.2.
( b ) *Notice.* At least 60 days prior to referring a debt owed to the Treasury Offset Program, PBGC will send notice to the debtor in accordance with the requirements of § 4903.5 of this part. PBGC will certify to the Financial Management Service's Treasury Offset Program that the debt is past due and legally enforceable in the amount submitted, and that the PBGC has made reasonable efforts to obtain payment of the debt as described in 31 CFR 285.2(d). In addition, PBGC will certify its compliance with all applicable due process and other requirements described in this part and other Federal laws. *See* 31 U.S.C. 3720A(b) and 31 CFR 285.2.
( c ) *Administrative review.* The notice described in § 4903.5 of this part will provide the debtor with at least 60 days prior to the initiation of tax refund offset to request an administrative review as described in § 4903.11(c) of this part. PBGC may suspend collection through tax refund offset and/or other collection actions pending the resolution of the debtor's dispute.
1 The Honorable Daniel J. Dinan, United States Tax Court Judge. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-3982

___________ James Logan Clark, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * Tax Court. * Commissioner of Internal Revenue, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 29, 1999 Filed: May 13, 1999

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jame s Logan Clark appeals from the tax court’s 1 deficiency determination upholdin g a deficiency determination by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, challengin g the constitutionality of 26 U.S.C. §§ 86, 6013 (1995). Having carefully reviewe d the record and the parties’ submissions, we agree with the tax court that neithe r section is unconstitutional
. See Rega n v. Taxation With Representation of Washington , 461 U.S. 540, 547 (1983) ; Dandridg e v. Williams , 397 U.S. 471, 485 (1970).-2-

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.