alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE *v.*HORACE M. MEADER.

*Ex post facto laiv. No.*39, *Acts*c/4886. *No.*36, *Acts*0/4888.

No. 39, Acts of 1886, provided a penalty for intoxication. No. 36, Acts of 1888, provided a different penalty, and repealed the act of 1886 without any-saving clause as to offences already committed.. *Held,*that there could he no conviction for an offense committed before the act of 1888 took effect.

This was *p,*complaint for intoxication. Heard at the September Term, 1889, Ross, J., presiding, upon the respondent’s motion to quash. The motion was denied and the respondent excepted. The case appears in the opinion.

*Wing (& Fay,*for the respondent.

There can be no conviction under the statute in force when the offense was committed, for that has been repealed, and there can be none under the present statute, for that was not then in force. Bish. Stat. Cr., ss. 168, 177 and cases cited ; *Commonwealth*v. *Marshall,*11 Pick. 350 ; *Commonwealth*v. *Kimball,*21 Pick. 373 ; *Commonwealth v. McDonough,*13 Allen, *581; Commonwealth*v. *Pattee,*12 Cush. 501; *Inhabitants of Saco*v. *Gurney,*34 Me. 14 ; *Keald*v. *State,*36 Me. 62*; Calkins*v. *State,*14 Ohio St. 222 ; *State v. Daley,*29 Conn. 272; *Hartung*v. *People,*22 N. Y. 95 ; 26 N. Y. 167 ; *Batzky*v. *People,*29 N. Y. 124.

*Es W. Bisbee,*State’s Attorney, for the State.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Munson, J.

The respondent is charged witli having been found intoxicated on the 28th day of May, 1888. The complaint is founded on No. 39, Acts of 1886. By No. 36, Acts of 1888, approved Nov. 27th, other provision was made for tho punishment of intoxication, and the act of 1886 was expressly repealed. The repealing statute contains no saving clause as to *459offenses previously committed. There js consequently no law under which the respondent can be punished. The law by which intoxication was punishable at the time of the respondent’s offense is no longer in force. The law by which intoxication may now be punished did not exist when the .respondent was found intoxicated. The respondent cannot be convicted under a statute which has been repealed. Neither can he be convicted under a statute enacted since the commission of his offense. *Commonwealth*v. Marshall, 11 Pick. 350 ; *State*v. Daley, 29 Conn. 272; *Hartung*v. *The*People, 22 N. Y. 95.

*Judgment reversed, complaint quashed, and respondent discharged.*
#### § 301-31.15 What documentation must I provide for reimbursement?

You must provide receipts or any other documentation required by your agency. However, in instances when documentation might compromise the security of the individuals involved, the head of the agency may waive these requirements.
No. 11-5088.

#### Briggs *v.*Pennsylvania.

Sup. Ct. Pa. Certio-rari denied.
---

---

Exhibit 15.1

|BDO | ZIV  HAFT
|--- | ---------

|Logo | Certified
Public Accountants (Isr.)
|---- | -----------------------------------

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the registration statement (333-148460) on Form S-8 of
Lumenis Ltd., of our report dated June 25, 2008 with respect to the consolidated
balance sheets of Lumenis Ltd. and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006
and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and changes in
shareholders equity (capital deficiency) for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2007, which report appears in the annual report on
Form 20-F of Lumenis Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2007.

| |  | /s/ Ziv Haft
Ziv HaftCertified Public Accountants (Isr.)A BDO member firm
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tel Aviv, Israel June 25,
2008



---

---
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 848 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.848

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
          For the relief of Sepandan Farnia and Farbod Farnia.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR SEPANDAN FARNIA AND FARBOD 
              FARNIA.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Sepandan Farnia and Farbod 
Farnia shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of 
status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Sepandan Farnia or Farbod Farnia 
enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in 
subsection (c), he shall be considered to have entered and remained 
lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment 
of status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as 
of the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.

    Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent residence to 
Sepandan Farnia and Farbod Farnia, the Secretary of State shall 
instruct the proper officer to reduce by two, during the current or 
next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that 
are made available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under 
section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if 
applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made available 
to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under section 202(e) of 
such Act.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4231

To prohibit regulations that classify, enhance, or diminish the privileges

and immunities of an Indian tribe relative to other federally recognized

Indian tribes, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 14, 1994

Mr. RICHARDSON (for himself and Mr. THOMAS of Wyoming) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

A BILL

To prohibit regulations that classify, enhance, or diminish

the privileges and immunities of an Indian tribe relative

to other federally recognized Indian tribes, and for other

purposes.

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

3 That section 16 of the Act of June 18, 1934 (25 U.S.C.

4 476), is amended by adding at the end the following new

5 subsections:

6 ‘‘(f) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF INDIAN

7 TRIBES; PROHIBITION ON NEW REGULATIONS.—The

8 head of a department or agency of the United States may
2

•HR 4231 IH

1 not promulgate any regulation or make any decision or

2 determination pursuant to this Act or any other Act of

3 Congress, with respect to a federally recognized Indian

4 tribe that classifies, enhances, or diminishes the privileges

5 and immunities available to the Indian tribe relative to

6 other federally recognized tribes by virtue of their status

7 as Indian tribes.

8 ‘‘(g) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF INDIAN

9 TRIBES; EXISTING REGULATIONS.—Any regulation or ad10 ministrative decision or determination of a department or

11 agency of the United States in existence or effect on the

12 date of enactment of this subsection that classifies, en13 hances, or diminishes the privileges and immunities avail14 able to a federally recognized Indian tribe relative to the

15 privileges and immunities available to other federally rec16 ognized tribes by virtue of their status as Indian tribes

17 shall have no force or effect.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          35,101
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,478,674
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,427,792
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,145,259
<PP&E>                                       1,615,431
<DEPRECIATION>                                 556,013
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,205,377
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,578,355
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,572,138
<OTHER-SE>                                     447,384
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,205,377
<SALES>                                      9,032,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,032,332
<CGS>                                        7,192,234
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,192,234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,751,213
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              83,552
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,333
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,745
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       588
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EX-10.3



 Exhibit 10.3 
  

			
	



	  	 Bottomline Technologies

325 Corporate Drive

Portsmouth, NH 03801
 P
603.436.0700


 November 17, 2016 

Mr. Joe Mullen 
 Dear Joe: 

The letter agreement dated November 14, 2013 (the “2013 Letter Agreement”), between you and Bottomline Technologies set forth the amended and
restated terms under which you would continue to be retained as Chairman for the three-year period ending November 17, 2017. The purpose of this letter agreement (the “2016 Letter Agreement”) is to extend the term of the 2013 Letter
Agreement for an additional three years, through November 19, 2020, subject to certain modifications described below. 
  

	A.	For the period commencing on November 17, 2017 and ending on November 19, 2020, Bottomline Technologies agrees to retain your services as Chairman for a fee of $115,000 per year. 


 

	B.	With respect to Sections 4 (Stock Options and Restricted Stock) and 5 (Vesting) of the 2010 Letter Agreement, any references to the date, “November 17, 2014,” (which were updated to “November 17,
2017” in the 2013 Letter Agreement) shall be replaced with “November 19, 2020”. 

  

	C.	With respect to Section 6 (Health Insurance), the reference to “age 65” was replaced with “age 70” in the 2013 Letter Agreement and will continue to be “age 70”. 


Except as otherwise expressly stated herein, all other terms of the 2013 Letter Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

Agreed as of the date set forth above. 
 BOTTOMLINE TECHNOLOGIES
(de), INC. 
  

							
	By:	 	 /s/ Michael J. Curran
	 		 	 /s/ Joseph L. Mullen

		 	Michael J. Curran	 		 	Joseph L. Mullen
		 	Chairman of Compensation Committee	 		 	
				
	By:	 	 /s/ Jennifer Gray
	 		 	
		 	Jennifer Gray	 		 	
		 	Member of Compensation Committee	 		 	


  
 1
#### § 101.213 Station identification.

Stations in these services are exempt from the requirement to identify transmissions by call sign or any other station identifier.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN RE COMPLAINT NO. 

F-08-90006 

Before MICHEL, Chief Judge. 

ORDER 

AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM

 A complaint of judicial misconduct was received by the court on September 4, 

2008. The complaint concerns a judge who holds office within the jurisdiction of the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The complaint mentions 

several judges, all of whom hold office within the jurisdiction of the Eleventh Circuit, 

although it appears to be directed to the first mentioned judge. 

 Pursuant to Rule 7(a)(1) of the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability 

Proceedings, a complaint against a judge "must be filed with the circuit clerk in the 

jurisdiction in which the subject judge holds office." If the complaint alleges misconduct 

in the course of official business while the subject judge was sitting on a court by 

designation, then the complaint may be filed either with the circuit clerk in the 

jurisdiction in which the subject judge sat by designation or with the circuit clerk in the 

jurisdiction in which the subject judge holds office. Rule 7(b) of the Rules for JudicialConduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings. 

 The complainant does not assert that any of the listed judges sat by designation 

with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Instead, the complaint 

concerns a judge, and possibly a list of judges, who all hold office within the jurisdiction 

of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Thus, the complaint was 

filed in the wrong circuit. Pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(F) of the Rules for Judicial-Conduct 
F-08-90006 2

and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, a complaint "must be dismissed in whole or in part 

to the extent that the chief judge concludes that the complaint . . . has been filed in the 

wrong circuit under Rule 7 . . . ." 

 Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

The complaint is dismissed pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(F) of the Rules for JudicialConduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings. 

 Sept. 8, 2008 /s/ Paul R. Michel 

 Date Paul R. Michel 

 Chief Judge 

 There is a right to file a petition for review of this order. Pursuant to Rule 18(b) of 

the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, any petition for 

review must be received by the circuit executive within 35 days of the date of the letter 

transmitting this order. Any petition must be sent to: 

Circuit Executive 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

717 Madison Place, NW 

Washington, DC 20439
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-2208: CUSTOMPLAY, LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"NrrVDkITg0\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/02-15-2022-20-2208-customplay-llc-v-amazoncom-inc-rule-36-judgment-20-2208-rule_36_judgment-2-15-2022_1908322\/\">20-2208: CUSTOMPLAY, LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/02-15-2022-20-2208-customplay-llc-v-amazoncom-inc-rule-36-judgment-20-2208-rule_36_judgment-2-15-2022_1908322\/embed\/#?secret=NrrVDkITg0\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-2208: CUSTOMPLAY, LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"NrrVDkITg0\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"RULE 36 JUDGMENT Posted: CUSTOMPLAY, LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-2208 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.2.10.3





AMENDMENT ONE


TO


THE CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.


DEFERRED INCOME PLAN


(Effective January 1, 2013)


In accordance with resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of Consolidated Edison Transmission, Inc., (“CET”) on November 4, 2016 and the Board of Directors of Consolidated Edison, Inc. and the Board of Trustees of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. on November 17, 2016, approving CET’s adoption of the Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Deferred Income Plan (the “Plan”), the undersigned hereby approves, effective as of January 1, 2017, the amendments to the Plan set forth below.


		
	1.
	Section 1.16 Company is amended by adding the following to the end thereof:  




“Company” shall also include any Affiliated Company listed in Appendix A that has adopted the Plan.


		
	2.
	An “APPENDIX A (Affiliated Companies that have adopted the Plan)” is hereby added to the Plan and section (a) thereunder is added as follows:




		
	(a)
	Consolidated Edison Transmission, Inc. shall become a Participating Company in the Plan effective as of January 1, 2017, and its eligible employees shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as other eligible employees of the Plan.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument this 22 day of December, 2016.






                    
/s/ Richard Bagwell
Plan Administrator, and Vice President - 
Human Resources
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 128 (Monday, July 3, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 41063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16701]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-2921-000]


JPower Inc.; Notice of Filing

June 27, 2000.
    Take notice that on June 13, 2000, JPower, Inc., tendered for 
filing notice of change in status. JPower requests that the name JPower 
and JPower's market based rate schedule under ER95-1421-000 be 
transferred to Great Lakes Energy Trading, LLC effective immediately.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before July 7, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-16701 Filed 6-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
4926 

4927 

4928 

4929 

4930 

4931 

4932 

4933 

4934 

4935 

4936 

4937 

4938 

4939 

4940 

4941 

4942 

4943 

4944 

4945 

4946 

4947 

4948 

4949 

4950 

4951 

4952 

4953 

4954 

4955 

4956 

4957 

4958 

4959 

4960 

4961 

4962 

4963 

4964 

4965 

4966 

4967 

4968 

4969 

4970 

4971 

4972 

4973 

4974 

4975 

4976 

4977 

4978 

4979 

4980 

4981 

4982 

4983 

4984 

4985 

4986 

4987 

4988 

4989 

4990 

4991 

4992 

4993 

4994 

4995 

4996 

4997 

4998 

4999 

5000 

5001 

5002 

5003 

5004 

5005 

5006 

5007 

5008 

5009 

5010 

5011 

5012 

5013 

5014 

5015 

5016 

5017 

5018 

5019 

5020 

5021 

5022 

5023 

5024 

5025 

5026 

5027 

5028 

5029 

5030 

5031 

5032 

5033 

5034 

5035 

5036 

5037 

5038 

5039 

5040 

5041 

5042 

5043 

5044 

5045 

5046 

5047 

5048 

5049 

5050 

5051 

5052 

5053 

5054 

5055 

5056 

5057 

5058 

5059 

5060 

5061 

5062 

5063 

5064 

5065 

5066 

5067 

5068 

5069 

5070 

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:21:32-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
No. 11-5391.

#### Pham *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
Exhibit






FIRST AMENDMENT TO 
INTEGRA LIFESCIENCES HOLDINGS CORPORATION
PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN


THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO INTEGRA LIFESCIENCES HOLDINGS CORPORATION PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN (this “First Amendment”), dated as of February 15, 2017, is made and adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Committee”) of Integra Lifesciences Holdings Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”).  Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Plan (as defined below).


RECITALS


WHEREAS, the Corporation maintains the Integra Lifesciences Holdings Corporation Performance Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”);


WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7.1 of the Plan, the Plan may be amended at any time by action of the Committee; and 


WHEREAS, the Corporation desires to amend the Plan to increase the maximum bonus opportunity for executive officers. 


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended as set forth herein.


AMENDMENT


		
	1.
	The last sentence of Section 3.3 of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:




“Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall the amount of a Bonus for an executive officer exceed 200% of such executive officer’s Target Bonus.”
		
	2.
	This First Amendment shall be and is hereby incorporated in and forms a part of the Plan.


		
	3.
	Except as expressly provided herein, all terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.




I hereby certify that the foregoing First Amendment was duly adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Integra Lifesciences Holdings Corporation on February 15, 2017.




Executed on this 15th day of February, 2017.




/s/Richard D. Gorelick    
Richard D. Gorelick
Corporate Vice President, General Counsel, Administration and Secretary