alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10 (p)

            COMPENSATORY ARRANGEMENTS WITH CERTAIN EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

     Set forth below are the base salaries of the individuals who will be
identified as named executive officers(1) of the Company in the Company's 2007
proxy statement. The salary increases for each named executive officer were
effective February 1, 2007.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                          NAME AND TITLE                              SALARY
                          --------------                              ------
<S>                                                                   <C>
       George H. Glatfelter II
       Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                           $590,000

       John P. Jacunski
       Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer               296,809

       Dante C. Parrini
       Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer            420,854

       William T. Yanavitch II
       Vice President Human Resources & Administration                 222,768
</TABLE>

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

          In addition to the individuals named below, John van Roden will be
identified as "named executive officer" in the Company's 2007 proxy statement.
However, on December 31, 2006, Mr. van Roden retired as Executive Vice President
of the Company. The annual base salaries are subject to adjustment pursuant to
the Company's employee compensation policies in effect from time to time. Each
of the above executive officers has a change in control employment agreement,
which is included as exhibits to the 2006 10-K. Also, each executive officer
participates in the Company's 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan and in its
Management Incentive Plan, each of which are incorporated by reference as
exhibits to the 2006 10-K.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4812

To direct the Administrator of General Services to acquire by transfer the

Old U.S. Mint in San Francisco, California, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 21, 1994

Mr. MINETA (for himself and Ms. PELOSI) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

A BILL

To direct the Administrator of General Services to acquire

by transfer the Old U.S. Mint in San Francisco, California, 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 SECTION 1. OLD U.S. MINT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.

4 Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment

5 of this Act, the Administrator of General Services shall

6 take such actions as may be necessary to acquire by trans7 fer, without consideration, the property referred to as the

8 ‘‘Old U.S. Mint’’, located at Fifth and Mission Streets in
2

•HR 4812 IH

1 San Francisco, California, together with any improve2 ments, structures, and fixtures located on the property.

Æ
- [Untitled]
- la 1970 3
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer
of ArthroCare Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:



Date: March 15, 2010

By:

/s/ TODD NEWTON Todd Newton Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer


The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before of after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---



QuickLinks
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

# Certification of Chief
Financial Officer Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with Amendment No. 2
to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report"),
by SPAR Group, Inc. (the "Registrant"), the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
knowledge:

1.    
          The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

2.    
          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

| | /s/ Charles Cimitile
Charles Cimitile
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
Date: June 21, 2006
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPAR Group, Inc. and will be
retained by SPAR Group, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.

9
Exhibit 10.16





Frederick
M. Strader

President and Chief
Executive Officer


December 30, 2004


 


 


Mr. Michael Boden


3822 Heaps School Road


Pylesville, MD  21132


Dear Mike:


It is with great pleasure
that I am extending to you an offer for the position of Executive Vice
President — Programs at a bi-weekly base salary of $8,656.00 or annualized at
$225,056.00.  In addition, your MIP TICA
percentage will be increased to 45%.  You
will receive an automobile allowance of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per
annum payable in accordance with our normal payroll practices.


The Board of Directors and I
look forward to the contributions you will make in your new position.


If this offer is acceptable
to you, please sign below and return to me.


	
  Sincerely,

  	
   

  	
  Acceptance:

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Frederick M.
  Strader

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Michael Boden

  



 


 


P.O.
Box 126


Hunt
Valley, Maryland 21030-0126


(410)
628-6600


Fax:
(410) 628-3644


mailto:Strader@aaicorp.com
§ 90.769 Construction and implementation of Phase II nationwide licenses. ( a ) A nationwide licensee must construct a sufficient number of base stations (*i.e.*, base stations for land mobile and/or paging operations) to provide coverage to a composite area of at least 750,000 square kilometers or 37.5 percent of the United States population within five years of the issuance of its initial license and a composite area of at least 1,500,000 square kilometers or 75 percent of the United States population within ten years of the issuance of its initial license. Licensees may, in the alternative, provide substantial service to their licensed areas at the appropriate five- and ten-year benchmarks.
( b ) Licensees must notify the Commission in accordance with § 1.946 of this chapter of compliance with the Construction requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) Failure by a nationwide licensee to meet the construction requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, as applicable, will result in automatic cancellation of its entire nationwide license. In such instances, nationwide licenses will not be converted to individual, site-by-site authorizations for already constructed stations.
( d ) Nationwide licensees will not be required to construct and place in operation, or commence service on, all of their authorized channels at all of their base stations or fixed stations.
[69 FR 75173, Dec. 15, 2004]
#### KOCIN v. UNITED STATES.

No. 150, Docket 21873.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 7, 1951.

Decided March 12, 1951.

*708Underhill & Rubinger; New York City (Hyman Frank, New York City, of counsel) , for trustee.

Theron Lamar Caudle, Ellis N. Slack, A. F. Prescott and Francis W. Sams, all of Washington, D. C. (Frank J. Parker, U. S. Atty., Nathan Borock, Asst. U. S. Atty., Brooklyn, N: Y., of counsel), for the United States.

Before L. HAND, SWAN and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the trustee in bankruptcy from an order confirming the order of the Referee allowing the claims of the United States for income and excess profits taxes For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1945. The Commissioner disallowed part of the sales commissions paid to Toy Sales Company. Toy Sales Company was a partnership which was organized in 1945 to take over the selling fünctions previously performed by the taxpayer. It was composed of three general partners and three special partners. The general partners were officers and stockholders of the taxpayer, the special partners were salesmen who had formerly been in the employ of the taxpayer. Each partner contributed $1,000. Each special partner received *6%*of his capital investment and 1%% commission on all sales. The balance of partnership profits was divided equally among the general partners. In the fiscal year 1945 they received some $22,000 from the partnership. In the fiscal year 1946 likewise they received some $27,-000. These sums the Commissioner charged back to gross income of the taxpayer thereby increasing its income and excess profits taxes due for the fiscal year 1945. Whether he was justified in SO' doing1 is the sole question here.

We think the Referee correctly answered it. That answer could rest on 26 U.S.C.A. § 22(a) and the doctrine which finds general expression in Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 5969 For the partnership served no business purpose. In keeping with the decisions, it could be called a “sham,” a “disguise,” a “masquerade,” a “fiction,” a“subterfuge,” a “make-believe,” a “mere pretense,” a “mask,” a “screen,” a “veil,” an “artifice,” a “ruse,” or other names, supplied by the dictionary, which indicate that it does not succeed as an insulator of the corporation from tax liability. The Commissioner relied on 26 U.S.C.A. § 45 and the Regulation issued pursuant thereto; they also sustain the decision below.

Affirmed.

1

. See also our opinion in that case, 2 Cir., 69 F.2d 809. The Supreme Court, 293 U.S. at page 469, 55 S.Ct. at page 267, said: “The reasoning of the court below * * * leaves little to be said.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
                    The Schedule contains summary financial 
                    information extracted from the financial
                    statements for Prudential-Bache OptiMax 
                    Futures Fund LP and is qualified in its entirety 
                    by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>

<RESTATED>          

<CIK>               0000866533
<NAME>              Prudential-Bache OptiMax Futures Fund LP
<MULTIPLIER>        1

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1996

<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-1-1996

<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1996

<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos

<CASH>                          3,794,460

<SECURITIES>                    11,742,663

<RECEIVABLES>                   0

<ALLOWANCES>                    0

<INVENTORY>                     0

<CURRENT-ASSETS>                15,537,123

<PP&E>                          0

<DEPRECIATION>                  0

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  15,537,123

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           1,238,122

<BONDS>                         0

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0

<PREFERRED>                     0

<COMMON>                        0

<OTHER-SE>                      14,299,001

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    15,537,123

<SALES>                         3,521,087

<TOTAL-REVENUES>                3,521,087

<CGS>                           0

<TOTAL-COSTS>                   1,970,054

<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>                    1,551,033

<EPS-PRIMARY>                   12.94

<EPS-DILUTED>                   0


</TABLE>
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4812 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4812

                       One Hundred Third Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America


                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
 the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-
                                  four


                                 An Act

  
 
  To direct the Administrator of General Services to acquire by transfer 
the Old U.S. Mint in San Francisco, California, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. OLD U.S. MINT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA.

    Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Administrator of General Services shall take such actions as may be 
necessary to acquire by transfer, without consideration, the property 
referred to as the ``Old U.S. Mint'', located at Fifth and Mission 
Streets in San Francisco, California, together with any improvements, 
structures, and fixtures located on the property.

SEC. 2. REPAIRS OF OLD U.S. MINT, SAN FRANCISCO.

    Nothing in this Act shall be construed to force the General 
Services Administration to repair the Old U.S. Mint building prior to 
repairs to other Federal buildings in greater need of repair.







                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.







                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.`
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.0



To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of GA Financial, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-66107 and 333-37837) on Form S-8 of GA Financial, Inc. of our report dated
February 1, 2002, with respect to the consolidated statements of financial
condition of GA Financial, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and
2000, and the related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive
income, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-
year period ended December 31, 2001, which report is incorporated by reference
in the December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of GA Financial, Inc.



/s/ KPMG LLP


Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
March 29, 2002
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 94-60826

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MOISES ESCAMILLA,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

_________________________________________________________________

December 1, 1995

Before KING, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Moises Escamilla appeals the two-year term of imprisonment

imposed by the district court when it revoked his supervised

release. Escamilla recognizes that this court (together with all

other circuit courts that have addressed the issue) has

consistently held that the policy statements in Chapter 7 of the

Sentencing Guidelines are merely advisory and that a court only

need consider them in rendering a decision. See, e.g., United

States v. Mathena, 23 F.3d 87, 92 (5th Cir. 1994). Escamilla

argues, however, that after the amendment of 18 U.S.C. §

3553(a)(4) by the Violent Crime Control & Law Enforcement Act of
 

1 Pub. L. No. 103-322, 108 Stat. 1976 (Sept. 13, 1994).

2

1994,1 the statute now requires that a district court sentence a

supervised release violator within the sentencing range

prescribed by the Sentencing Commission's "policy" statements

concerning violations of probation and supervised release, even

though the Sentencing Commission itself states that these policy

statements are not mandatory. The Court of Appeals for the Sixth

Circuit addressed and rejected this argument in a well-reasoned

opinion by Chief Judge Merritt in United States v. West, 59 F.3d

32 (6th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, No. 95-6370, 1995 WL 625069

(U.S. Nov. 13, 1995). We too reject this argument for the

reasons set out in West. Unless and until the Sentencing

Commission issues guidelines for Chapter 7 or changes the policy

statements to guidelines or Congress unequivocally legislates

that the policy statements in Chapter 7 are binding, this court

will not reduce the flexibility of the district courts in

sentencing supervised release violators.

Escamilla's sentence is hereby AFFIRMED.
#### Carl Chestnut, *Plaintiff in*Error, vs. The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

143 So. 413.

Division B.

*428Opinion filed August 8, 1932.

Petition for rehearing denied September 26, 1932.

*Oxford (& Cults,*for Plaintiff! in Error;

*Gary D. Landis,*Attorney General, and *Boy Campbell,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff in error was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record of Polk County for assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. He was tried and convicted of assault with intent to commit murder in the second degree and sentenced to five years in the state penitentiary. He seeks relief from that judgment by writ of error.

Overruling the motion for new trial, the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict and the alleged misleading effect of certain charges given by the trial court are assigned as error.

We have examined the record and there appears ample evidence to support the verdict. Some of the charges fail to conform to good English usage but the whole charge was fair and conformed to a reasonably accurate statement of the law. If any error was committed, it was harmless for which reversal does not lie. Section 2812 Revised General Statutes of 1920 (Section 4499 Compiled General Laws of 1927).

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Davis, J. J., concur.

Buford, C.J., and Brown, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Ellis, J., agrees to the conclusion of affirmance.
§ 102-2.80 What steps must an agency take to deviate from the FMR? ( a ) Consult informally with appropriate GSA program personnel to learn more about how your agency can work within the FMR's requirements instead of deviating from them. The consultation process may also highlight reasons why an agency would not be permitted to deviate from the FMR; e.g., statutory constraints.
( b ) Formally request a deviation, if consultations indicate that your agency needs one. The head of your agency or a designated official should write to GSA's Regulatory Secretariat to the attention of a GSA official in the program office that is likely to consider the deviation. (See the FMR bulletin that lists contacts in GSA's program offices and § 102-2.90.) The written request must fully explain the reasons for the deviation, including the benefits that the agency expects to achieve.
Exhibit
10.32





OBAGI MEDICAL
PRODUCTS

OMP. Inc.

310 GOLDEN SHORE, SUITE 120 LONG

BEACH. CALIFORNIA 90802


June
13, 2003


Stephen Garcia

9839 La Arena Circle

Fountain Valley, CA 92708


Dear
Stephen:


We are
pleased to confirm your acceptance of the position of Director of Finance
and Corporate Controller with OMP, Inc. We look forward to you joining the Company and
to a successful and enjoyable working relationship.


You
are expected to perform the duties customarily associated with this position on a full-time basis,
and will report directly to the CFO. The duties of your position, title, and
the position to which you report are subject to change. Your employment will commence no later than July 1, 2003.


Salary: Your annual base
salary shall be $125,000.00, paid
in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll practices, subject to standard payroll
deductions and withholdings.


Annual
Performance Bonus: You shall be entitled to an annual performance bonus based on the
achievement of certain benchmarks to be set by the Board of Directors of the
Company in its discretion. You will be eligible for an annual performance bonus of up
to 20% of your base salary
beginning in the year 2003, as adjusted for performance in accordance with the
benchmarks to be established, payable the following year (Q1 of 2004). No bonus is
payable unless
you are employed by the Company on December 31st of the applicable year.   All bonuses will be paid in accordance with
the Company’s normal payroll practices, subject to standard payroll deductions and
withholdings. Your bonus payments and eligibility are ultimately at the discretion
of the Board of Directors and
may be altered at any time.


Health/Insurance Benefits: You will be eligible
to enroll in the Company’s group life,
medical, dental and vision plans on July 1,
2003.


 


 


PH 562-628-1008


 


FX 562-628-1007


 



 1
 









June 12, 2003


401k: You will be eligible to enroll in the Company’s
401K plan on January 1, 2004.


Vacation: You will receive three weeks paid vacation annually,
according to the OMP Company
Policy.


Your employment with OMP is “At-Will” and may be
terminated by yourself or OMP
with or without cause, at any time (including during and after the introductory period), for any reason whatsoever
without advance notice. This at-will employment relationship supercedes
any prior agreement or promise, whether
made orally or written and cannot be changed except in writing and signed by
the Chairman of the Board of OMP. Your signature below confirms your understanding that your employment with OMP
is “At-Will” at all times.


Please find the your new hire documents attached. All
accompanying forms must be completed and returned to Ericka Concha upon or
prior to your start date
with OMP.


Sincerely,


	
  OMP, Inc.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Curtis Cluff

  	
   

  
	
  Curtis Cluff,
  CFO/SVP Operations

  



Your signature constitutes the acknowledgement of receipt
of this offer letter and accompanying
forms.


	
  /s/ Stephen Garcia

  	
   

  
	
  Stephen Garcia

  



 



 2
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Jones Soda Co. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jennifer L. Cue, Chief Financial
Officer and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



1. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2. the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|                                                    |  |             
|--------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|/s/ Jennifer L. Cue                                 |  | May 14, 2004
|Jennifer L. Cue                                     |  |             
|Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer |  |