alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.49.2


 







 


December 20, 2016


Mary Sue Patchett

111 Westwood Place, Suite 400

 Brentwood, TN 37027


Re:          Severance Pay Policy


Dear Ms. Patchett:


Reference is made the Brookdale Senior Living Inc. ("Brookdale") Severance Pay Policy, Tier I dated as of August 6, 2010, as amended by that certain Amendment No. 1 to Severance Pay Policy, Tier I dated as of April 23, 2015 and that certain Amendment No. 2 to Severance Pay Policy, Tier I dated as of August 3, 2015 (the "Severance Policy").  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Severance Policy.


You currently participate in the Severance Policy as an "Other Eligible Employee."  On the terms and conditions set forth in this letter, Brookdale desires to provide you the benefit described below in addition to the benefits to which you would otherwise be entitled under the Severance Policy as an Other Eligible Employee.  The following additional benefit shall become effective on January 1, 2017 and shall, upon such date, supersede that certain letter agreement dated November 16, 2015 by and between you and the Company.


Additional Benefit


If your Separation from Service occurs on or after January 1, 2017 and on or before December 31, 2017, and at the time of such Separation from Service you are entitled to Severance Pay pursuant to Section 4(a)(ii) of the Severance Policy, then in addition to such Severance Pay you shall be eligible to receive twelve (12) months' salary at your current rate of base salary in effect at the Separation from Service (the "Additional Amount").  The Additional Amount shall be treated as, and subject to the terms and conditions associated with, "Severance Pay" under the Severance Policy; provided, however, that the Severance Pay Period shall not be affected by the payment of the Additional Amount.


You shall have no right to receive, and Brookdale shall have no obligation to pay, the Additional Amount if your Separation from Service occurs after December 31, 2017 or at the time of such Separation from Service you are not entitled to Severance Pay pursuant to Section 4(a)(ii) of the Severance Policy.


*  *  *  *  *
















If you desire to accept the terms set forth above, please confirm your agreement to the foregoing by executing and delivering this letter to me.







	 	 	
Sincerely,

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
Brookdale Senior Living Inc.

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
By:

	 /s/ Cedric T. Coco	 
	 	
Name:

	
Cedric T. Coco

	 
	 	
Title:

	
Executive Vice President and


Chief People Officer

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED

	 	 	 
	
as of December 20, 2016:

	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
/s/ Mary Sue Patchett

	 	 	 	 
	
Mary Sue Patchett

	 	 	 















2
# #16

MEMO TO THE FILE 

### 3112/03 Building Technologies meeting with representatives ofthe Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) and Lennox International (Lennox). Wednesday, March 12,2003, at the Department ofEnergy (DOE), Washington, DC. Attendees: K. Amrane (ARI); B. Berringer (DOE); D. Lewis (Lennox); M. McCabe (DOE); J. Mullen (Lennox). The purpose ofthe meeting was to discuss four issues concerning the commercial unitary central airconditioningrulemaking. These are identified in the attached documents from Lennox, dated 

### 311 0103. (See docket file 

### #15)
The Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program (FLTCIP) 

LONG TERM CARE 

If you cannot perform everyday tasks such as eating, dressing, and bathing because of a chronic illness, injury, 

disability, or aging, FLTCIP can help you pay for the assistance you need. 

Who can apply for coverage? Why would 

someone need 

long term care? 

Where would 

someone 

receive care? 

Cost without 

long term care 

insurance 

Most Federal employees 

(check with your human resources

office if you are unsure of your eligibility), 

Annuitants regardless of FEHB 

eligibility, 

And their qualifying relatives, 

including: 

• Spouse 

• Same-sex domestic partner 

• Adult children 

• Parents and parents-in-law 

(of employees only) 

• Car accident 

• Sports accident 

• Disabling injury 

• Alzheimer’s 

• Stroke 

• Multiple sclerosis 

• Parkinson’s 

• Other disabling 

condition 

• Old age 

Home 

Assisted living 

facility 

Nursing home 

$30,000/year 

$41,000/year 

$83,000/year 

*Nat’l averages, 

John Hancock 

2013 Cost of 

Care Survey 

How much 

coverage 

should I get? 

How much 

does it cost? 

How do I get coverage under the Federal Long Term 

Care Insurance Program (FLTCIP)? 

Use the Cost of 

Care In Your 

Area tool at 

LTCfeds.com 

Consider how 

much of your 

own savings you 

can spend on 

long term care Use the Calculate 

Premiums tool 

at LTCfeds.com 

Premiums are 

based on your 

age when 

you apply 

Premiums are 

not guaranteed 

and may change 

in the future 

You must apply, answer health questions, and be 

approved for enrollment. Your qualified relative can apply 

even if you do not 

• First 60 days as newly eligible employee 

(fewer questions - employee & spouse only) 

• First 60 days after employee’s marriage 

(fewer questions - spouse only) 

• Long term care open season 

(fewer questions - infrequent) 

• Anytime 

(more questions - all eligible individuals) 

MORE INFO: www.LTCfeds.com 

For complete information, including terms and conditions, please visit www.LTCfeds.com. 

U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
153P16

#### State v. Nashid Porter

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for Notice of Appeal

1. Dismissed 05/23/2016

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of Superior Court, New Hanover County

2. Dismissed as moot 05/23/2016

3. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

3. Dismissed as moot 05/23/2016
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 12502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04842]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Bio-Oil Co-Processing: Expanding the Refinery Supply System 
Workshop

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) today gives notice of an open 
workshop hosted by the Bioenergy Technologies Office's (BETO's) 
Conversion Program to discuss the current state of technology and 
efforts needed to understand and specify bio-oil intermediate 
requirements for use in petroleum refineries.
    Dates and Times: Morning Session: April 3, 2014, 8:00 a.m.--12:00 
p.m. Afternoon Session: April 3, 2014, 1:00 p.m.--5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Renaissance New Orleans Arts Hotel, 700 Tchoupitoulas 
Street, New Orleans, LA 70130.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions may be directed to--Liz 
Moore at (720) 356-1392 or by email at Liz.Moore@go.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As stated in the Bioenergy Technologies 
Office's (BETO's) Multi-Year Program Plan, the mission of BETO is to 
develop and transform our renewable biomass resources into commercially 
viable, high-performance biofuels, bioproducts, and biopower through 
targeted research, development, demonstration, and deployment supported 
through public and private partnerships. One of the options being 
pursued by BETO involves developing technologies capable of producing a 
bio-oil intermediate to be used as a petroleum refinery feedstock, 
leveraging existing infrastructure. BETO wants to identify the next 
step(s) in gathering information about the physiochemical properties, 
reactivities, and compatibilities of intermediates to petroleum 
refineries. Understanding and specifying bio-oil intermediate 
requirements for use in petroleum refineries and the limitations of the 
distribution infrastructure are critical. The workshop will convene 
university, national laboratory, industry, advocacy, government, and 
other stakeholders from both the renewable energy and petroleum 
refining industries to discuss the potential for bio-oil co-processing, 
challenges currently facing the refining industry, and the advantages 
that could be realized in a co-processing partnership.
    Public Participation: Members of the public are encouraged to 
participate in open discussion at the workshop. For registration 
information, visit the following Web site: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/bioenergy/bio-oil_2014_workshop.html.

    Issued in Golden, CO, on March 3, 2014.
Lalida Crawford,
Contracting Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-04842 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
# Comments on: 18-1585: HICKEY v. DHS [OPINION], Nonprecedential
No. 11-9197.

#### Freeman *v.*Byrne et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Big Water

Paria Canyon-
Vermilion Clits

Location Index
Route Designations

F eG

Proparod by
Anaona Stip GIS Team
December 2007
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4480

To expand the boundary of the Weir Farm National Historic Site in the

State of Connecticut.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 24, 1994

Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut (for himself, Mrs. KENNELLY, Mr. SHAYS, Mr.

GEJDENSON, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, and Ms. DELAURO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural

Resources

A BILL

To expand the boundary of the Weir Farm National Historic

Site in the State of Connecticut.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Weir Farm National

5 Historic Site Expansion Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

7 The purpose of this Act is to preserve the last re8 maining undeveloped parcels of the historic Weir Farm

9 that remain in private ownership by including the parcels
2

•HR 4480 IH

1 within the boundary of the Weir Farm National Historic

2 Site.

3 SEC. 3. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

4 (a) ADJUSTMENT.—Section 4(b) of the Weir Farm

5 National Historic Site Establishment Act of 1990 (104

6 Stat. 1171) is amended—

7 (1) by striking out ‘‘and’’ at the end of para8 graph (1);

9 (2) by striking out the flush material below

10 paragraph (2); and

11 (3) by adding at the end the following:

12 ‘‘(3) the approximately 2-acre parcel of land sit13 uated in the town of Wilton, Connecticut, designated

14 as lot 18 on a map entitled ‘Revised Map of Section

15 I, Thunder Lake at Wilton, Connecticut, Scale 1′′=

16 100′, October 27, 1978, Ryan and Faulds Land

17 Surveyors, Wilton, Connecticut’, that is on file in the

18 office of the town clerk of the town of Wilton, and

19 therein numbered 3673; and

20 ‘‘(4) the approximately 0.6-acre western portion

21 of a parcel of land situated in the town of Wilton,

22 Connecticut, designated as Tall Oaks Road on the

23 map referred to in paragraph (3).’’.
3

•HR 4480 IH

1 (b) GENERAL DEPICTION.—Section 4 of such Act, as

2 amended by subsection (a), is further amended by adding

3 at the end the following:

4 ‘‘(c) GENERAL DEPICTION.—The parcels referred to

5 in paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (b) are all

6 as generally depicted on a map entitled ‘Boundary Map,

7 Weir Farm National Historic Site’, dated March 1994.

8 Such map shall be on file and available for public inspec9 tion in the appropriate offices of the National Park

10 Service.’’.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7585

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL FOREMAN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. 

(1:11-cr-00398-JKB-1, 1:15-cv-01258-JKB)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 1, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Foreman, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin M. Block, OFFICE OF 

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Henry Brandis Marsh, Jr., Special 

Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Foreman seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Foreman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny Foreman’s motion for 

an order directing the district court to explain the sentence,

and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 
3

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
No. 11-108.

#### Korda *v.*Bouchard, Sheriff, Oakland County, Michigan, et al.

Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 2.909 Responsible party. ( a ) In the case of equipment that requires the issuance of a grant of certification, the party to whom that grant of certification is issued is responsible for the compliance of the equipment with the applicable technical and other requirements. If any party other than the grantee modifies the radio frequency equipment and that party is not working under the authorization of the grantee pursuant to § 2.929(b), the party performing the modification is responsible for compliance of the product with the applicable administrative and technical provisions in this chapter.
( b ) For equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity the party responsible for the compliance of the equipment with the applicable standards, who must be located in the United States (see § 2.1077), is set forth as follows: ( 1 ) The manufacturer or, if the equipment is assembled from individual component parts and the resulting system is subject to authorization under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, the assembler.
( 2 ) If the equipment by itself, or, a system is assembled from individual parts and the resulting system is subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity and that equipment or system is imported, the importer.
( 3 ) Retailers or original equipment manufacturers may enter into an agreement with the responsible party designated in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section to assume the responsibilities to ensure compliance of equipment and become the new responsible party.
( 4 ) If the radio frequency equipment is modified by any party not working under the authority of the responsible party, the party performing the modifications, if located within the U.S., or the importer, if the equipment is imported subsequent to the modifications, becomes the new responsible party.
( c ) If the end product or equipment is subject to both certification and Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (*i.e.,* composite system), all the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply.
( d ) If, because of modifications performed subsequent to authorization, a new party becomes responsible for ensuring that a product complies with the technical standards and the new party does not obtain a new equipment authorization, the equipment shall be labeled, following the specifications in § 2.925(d), with the following: “This product has been modified by [insert name, address and telephone number or internet contact information of the party performing the modifications].”
( e ) In the case of transfer of control of equipment, as in the case of sale or merger of the responsible party, the new entity shall bear the responsibility of continued compliance of the equipment.
[82 FR 50825, Nov. 2, 2017, as amended at 88 FR 7623, Feb. 6, 2023]
No. 11-5036.

#### Sanchez *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****National compensation survey.Private industry. Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.**
 
SuDoc Number:L 2.121/10:AU 4/

Item Number:0768-B-10 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000879159
 
2008 | 2009 | 2010
 
April 27, 2020
#### § 13.217 Records.

Each COLEM recovering fees from examinees must maintain records of expenses and revenues, frequency of examinations administered, and examination pass rates. Records must cover the period from January 1 to December 31 of the preceding year and must be submitted as directed by the Commission. Each COLEM must retain records for 3 years and the records must be made available to the FCC upon request.

[78 FR 23154, Apr. 18, 2013]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,007
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,603
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,865
<INVENTORY>                                     17,415
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,484
<PP&E>                                           6,131
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,272
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,332
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,116
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,754
<SALES>                                        108,674
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               108,884
<CGS>                                           69,364
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,156
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,374
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,782
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,782
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 5, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41329-41330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16915]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 99-ASW-33]
RIN 2120-AA66


Realignment of Jet Route; TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action corrects a final rule published in the Federal 
Register on June 14, 2000 (Airspace Docket No. 99-ASW-33). The legal 
description of Jet Route 25 (J-25) contained an inadvertent error 
between the Corpus Christi, TX, Very High Frequency Omnidirectional 
Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and the San Antonio, TX, VORTAC. 
This action corrects that error.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bil Nelson, Airspace and Rules 
Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 14, 2000, Airspace Docket No. 99-
ASW-33, FR Doc. 00-14909, was published amending the legal description 
of J-25 between the Corpus Christi, TX, VORTAC and the San Antonio, TX, 
VORTAC (65 FR 37277). This rule inadvertently listed the true bearing 
between Corpus Christi, TX, and San Antonio, TX, as ``166 deg. .'' The 
correct true bearing is ``174 deg..'' The correct true bearing was 
listed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this matter.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the legal 
description for J-25 as published in the Federal Register on June 24, 
2000 (65 FR 37277), FR Doc. 00-14909, and incorporated by reference in 
14 CFR 71.1, is corrected as follows:


Sec. 71.1  [Corrected]

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes

* * * * *

[[Page 41330]]

J-25 [Revised]

    From the INT of the United States/Mexican Border and the 
Brownsville, TX, INT 221 deg. radial via Brownsville; INT of the 
Brownsville 358 deg. and the Corpus Christi, TX, 178 deg. radials; 
Corpus Christi; INT of the Corpus Christi 311 deg. and the San 
Antonio, TX, 174 deg. radials; San Antonio; Centex, TX; Waco, TX; 
Ranger, TX; Tulsa, OK; Kansas City, MO; Des Moines, IA; Mason City, 
IA; Gopher, MN; Brainerd, MN; to Winnipeg, MB, Canada. The airspace 
within Canada is excluded. The airspace within Mexico is excluded.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2000.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Division
[FR Doc. 00-16915 Filed 7-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P