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



Exhibit 10.4



SECOND AMENDMENT TO
CHICO’S FAS, INC. 
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


Pursuant to the authority granted under Section 10.2 of the Chico’s FAS, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (as amended and restated on January 1, 2019 and as amended thereafter) (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended as set forth below.
1.    Section 4.2 of the Plan is amended in its entirety, effective April 4, 2020, to read as follows:


		
	4.2
	Matching Contributions.  The Company shall credit a Matching Contribution to the Plan on behalf of each Participant with respect to each Plan Year or partial Plan Year starting with Plan Year beginning January 1, 2019 and ending with the pay period ending April 4, 2020.  For Plan Year 2019, Base Pay Deferrals related to Compensation earned in 2018 that is paid in 2019 for the payroll that includes December 31, 2018, shall be credited with a Matching Contribution.  For the Plan Year beginning January 1, 2019, the amount of the Company Matching Contribution shall equal fifty percent (50%) of the first two and a half percent (2.5%) of a Participant’s Base Pay Deferrals.  Matching Contributions shall be allocated to the same Retirement/Termination Account or Specified Date Account as the related Base Pay Deferrals and shall be subject to the same Payment Schedule as applicable to the related Base Pay Deferrals, in each case as provided in Section 4.1(c).  To the extent no designations are made under Section 4.1(c), then the default provisions in Section 4.1(c) and Section 6.2 shall apply to the Matching Contributions. Notwithstanding any other provision in the Plan, no Matching Contribution shall be credited to the Plan on behalf of any Participant with respect to Base Pay Deferrals related to Compensation earned for all payrolls beginning on or after April 5, 2020.






2.    All other provisions of the Plan shall remain in effect.  




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Second Amendment to the Plan is hereby adopted on this 31 day of March, 2020.
CHICO’S FAS, INC.
By: Gregory S. Baker
Title: SVP-General Counsel & Corp. Secy.
#### In the Matter of the Election of Directors of The Silent Writing Machine Company. John MacKay, Appellant; The Silent Writing Machine Company et al., Respondents.

*MaAier of Silent Writing Machine Go.,*134 App. Div. 995, affirmed.

(Argued January 4, 1910;

decided January 18, 1910.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the •Supreme Court in the fourth .judicial department, entered November 24, 1909, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application to set aside an election of directors of a corporation.

*Louis Marshall*and *Abraham Benedict*for appellant.

*Morris Cohn, Jr.,*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscocic and Chase, JJ.
§ 618.310 Recruitment. ( a ) *Nondiscriminatory recruitment.* A recipient to which §§ 618.300 through 618.310 apply shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in the recruitment and admission of students. A recipient may be required to undertake additional recruitment efforts for one sex as remedial action pursuant to § 618.110(a), and may choose to undertake such efforts as affirmative action pursuant to § 618.110(b).
( b ) *Recruitment at certain institutions.* A recipient to which §§ 618.300 through 618.310 apply shall not recruit primarily or exclusively at educational institutions, schools, or entities that admit as students only or predominantly members of one sex, if such actions have the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex in violation of §§ 618.300 through 618.310.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 50 (Thursday, March 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 12198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1197]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on February 1, 2007, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Mobile Enterprise Alliance, 
Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its 
membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Traverse 
Networks, Newark, CA has withdrawn as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc. 
intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes 
in membership.
    On June 24, 2004, Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc. filed its 
original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The 
Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register 
pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 44062).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on October 27, 
2006. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67642).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 07-1197 Filed 3-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
From: Llenza, Charles [mailto:Charles.Llenza@ee.doe.gov] 

Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 4:15 PM 

To: undisclosed-recipients 

Subject: Notification of a final rule establishing energy conservation standards for Refrigerated Bottled 

or Canned Beverage Vending Machines (BVM) (Docket No. EERE-2006-STD-0125, RIN 1904-AB58) 

Importance: High 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 

On August 7, 2009, DOE issued a final rule establishing energy conservation standards 

for refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines. Due to the provisions of 

42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(3), publication in the Federal Register of this final rule will not occur 

prior to August 27, 2009. Pending publication, DOE is making the final rule available for 

the convenience of interested parties. While DOE expects no substantive changes in 

the final rule when it is published, should there be any differences, the final rule 

published in the Federal Register is the legally effective version. The standards 

established in the final rule will be applied three years from the date of publication in the 

Federal Register.

For the final rule and/or additional information on energy conservation standards for 

refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines please click on the following 

DOE website link:

 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/beverage_mac

hines.html

 

If you have any additional questions please feel free to contact: 

Charles Llenza

Project Manager/Engineer 

Appliance Standards Team 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

US Department of Energy 

(202)586-2192(work) 

(202)287-1590(fax) 

Charles.Llenza@ee.doe.gov

 

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

*******************************************************************************************

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED 

FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMES ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED 

RECIPIENT, OR AN EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED 

RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY 

PROHIBITED. IF THIS MESSAGE CONTAINS NON-PUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT ANY CONSUMER OR CUSTOMER OF 

THE SENDER OR INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE FURTHER PROHIBITED UNDER PENALTY OF LAW FROM USING OR 

DISCLOSING THE INFORMATION TO ANY THIRD PARTY BY PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL GRAMM-LEACH-BAILEY ACT. IF YOU 

HAVE RECEIVED THIS FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND 

RETURN OR DESTROY THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO ASSURE THAT IT IS NOT READ, COPIED, OR DISTRIBUTED BY OTHERS.

 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 73
#### § 63.19 Budget revisions and minor deviations.

Pursuant to § 74.102(d) of this title, paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of that section are waived.
FILED: August 6, 2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 11-1760

(3:08-cv-00483-JRS)

___________________

THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT ABORTION, INC., f/k/a The Real Truth About 

Obama, Inc.

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE

 Defendants - Appellees

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

DEMOCRACY 21; THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER

 Amici Supporting Appellee

___________________

M A N D A T E

___________________

The judgment of this court, entered 6/12/2012, takes effect today.

This constitutes the formal mandate of this court issued pursuant to Rule 

Appeal: 11-1760 Doc: 44 Filed: 08/06/2012 Pg: 1 of 2
41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

/s/Patricia S. Connor, Clerk

Appeal: 11-1760 Doc: 44 Filed: 08/06/2012 Pg: 2 of 2
§ 702.55 Public announcement of meetings. ( a ) *Agenda.* The Staff Director shall set as early as possible but in any event at least eight calendar days before a meeting, the time, location, and subject matter for the meeting. Agenda items will be identified in adequate detail to inform the general public of the specific business to be discussed at the meeting.
( b ) *Notice.* The Staff Director, at least eight calendar days before a meeting, shall make public announcement of: ( 1 ) The time of the meeting;
( 2 ) Its location;
( 3 ) Its subject matter;
( 4 ) Whether it is open or closed to the public; and
( 5 ) The name and phone number of a Commission staff member who will respond to requests for information about the meeting.
( c ) *Changes.* ( 1 ) The time of day or location of a meeting may be changed following the public announcement required by paragraph (b) of this section, if the Staff Director publicly announces such change at the earliest practicable time subsequent to the decision to change the time of day or location of the meeting.
( 2 ) The date of a meeting may be changed following the public announcement required by paragraph (b) of this section, or a meeting may be scheduled less than eight calendar days in advance, if: ( i ) Four Commissioners when no Commissioner's position is vacant, three Commissioners when there is such a vacancy, or two Commissioners on a subcommittee authorized under 42 U.S.C. 1975a(d), determine by recorded vote that Commission business requires such a meeting at an earlier date; and
( ii ) The Staff Director, at the earliest practicable time following such vote, makes public announcement of the time, location, and subject matter of such meeting and whether it is open or closed to the public.
( 3 ) The subject matter of a meeting or the determination to open or close a meeting or a portion of a meeting to the public may be changed following the public announcement required by paragraph (b) of this section if: ( i ) Four Commissioners when no Commissioner's position is vacant, three Commissioners when there is such a vacancy, or two Commissioners on a subcommittee authorized under 42 U.S.C. 1975a(e)(1) determine by recorded vote that Commission business so requires; and
( ii ) The Staff Director publicly announces such change and the vote of each Commissioner upon such change at the earliest practicable time subsequent to the decision to make such change.
( d ) ( 1 ) Federal Register. Immediately following all public announcements required by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, notice of the time, location, and subject matter of a meeting, whether the meeting is open or closed to the public, any change in one of the preceding, and the name and phone number of the official designated by the Commission to respond to requests for information about meeting, shall be submitted for publication in the Federal Register.
( 2 ) Notice of a meeting will be published in the Federal Register even after the meeting that is the subject of the notice has occurred in order to provide a public record of all Commission meetings.
§ 75.464 Relocation costs of employees. ( a ) Relocation costs are costs incident to the permanent change of duty assignment (for an indefinite period or for a stated period of not less than 12 months) of an existing employee or upon recruitment of a new employee. Relocation costs are allowable, subject to the limitations described in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section, provided that: ( 1 ) The move is for the benefit of the employer.
( 2 ) Reimbursement to the employee is in accordance with an established written policy consistently followed by the employer.
( 3 ) The reimbursement does not exceed the employee's actual (or reasonably estimated) expenses.
( b ) Allowable relocation costs for current employees are limited to the following: ( 1 ) The costs of transportation of the employee, members of his or her immediate family and his household, and personal effects to the new location.
( 2 ) The costs of finding a new home, such as advance trips by employees and spouses to locate living quarters and temporary lodging during the transition period, up to maximum period of 30 calendar days.
( 3 ) Closing costs, such as brokerage, legal, and appraisal fees, incident to the disposition of the employee's former home. These costs, together with those described in (4), are limited to 8 per cent of the sales price of the employee's former home.
( 4 ) The continuing costs of ownership (for up to six months) of the vacant former home after the settlement or lease date of the employee's new permanent home, such as maintenance of buildings and grounds (exclusive of fixing-up expenses), utilities, taxes, and property insurance.
( 5 ) Other necessary and reasonable expenses normally incident to relocation, such as the costs of canceling an unexpired lease, transportation of personal property, and purchasing insurance against loss of or damages to personal property. The cost of canceling an unexpired lease is limited to three times the monthly rental.
( c ) Allowable relocation costs for new employees are limited to those described in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section. When relocation costs incurred incident to the recruitment of new employees have been charged to a Federal award and the employee resigns for reasons within the employee's control within 12 months after hire, the non-Federal entity must refund or credit the Federal Government for its share of the cost. However, the costs of travel to an overseas location must be considered travel costs in accordance with § 75.474, and not § 75.464, for the purpose of this paragraph if dependents are not permitted at the location for any reason and the costs do not include costs of transporting household goods.
( d ) The following costs related to relocation are unallowable: ( 1 ) Fees and other costs associated with acquiring a new home.
( 2 ) A loss on the sale of a former home.
( 3 ) Continuing mortgage principal and interest payments on a home being sold.
( 4 ) Income taxes paid by an employee related to reimbursed relocation costs.
#### § 605.9 Administrative requirements for small recipients.

The Director may require any recipient with fewer than fifteen employees, or any class of such recipients, to comply with §§ 605.7 and 605.8, in whole or in part, when the Director finds a violation of this part or finds that such compliance will not significantly impair the ability of the recipient or class or recipients to provide benefits or services.
#### § 706.1 Cross-references to employee ethical conduct standards, financial disclosure and financial interests regulations and other conduct rules.

Employees of the United States Commission on Civil Rights are subject to the executive branch standards of ethical conduct contained in 5 CFR part 2635, the Commission regulations at 5 CFR part 7801 which supplement the executive branchwide standards, the executive branch financial disclosure regulations contained in 5 CFR part 2634, and the executive branch financial interests regulations contained in 5 CFR part 2640, as well as the executive branch employee responsibilities and conduct regulations contained in 5 CFR part 735.

[73 FR 33727, June 13, 2008]
Original,

No. 5914.

#### County of Hillsborough *v.*Superior Court.

Argued March 5, 1969.

Decided March 20, 1969.

*James A. Connor,*county attorney (by brief and orally), for the plaintiff.

*Edward P. McDuJJee*and *Joseph L. Clough {Mr. Clough*orally), for Rudolph A. Matheisel.

Per curiam.

This is a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to stay an order of the Superior Court that the plaintiff reinstate welfare benefits to Rudolph A. Matheisel pending an appeal from an order made in a bill in equity brought by Matheisel against the county.

It appears that on April 29, 1968, Matheisel sought by bill in equity to obtain certain additional welfare benefits from the county. After hearing, the Court, on August 26, 1968, ordered the county to re-evaluate his needs and to grant him reasonable assistance for food and clothing. On November 12, 1968, Matheisel filed a petition for contempt against the county commissioners. After hearing, the Court, on January 9, 1969, ordered compliance with its order of August 26 and at the same time ordered Matheisel to submit to an examination by the county physician. Matheisel refused to be examined. On January 13, 1969, the commissioners ordered him removed to the county *334farm and gave notice that the county would no longer pay a food order. On January 28, 1969, Matheisel moved that the commissioners be enjoined from removing him to the county farm and alleged a denial of due process by the commissioners. The motion was denied subject to exception, and the Court ordered a reserved case to be filed not later than March 4, 1969 and ordered benefits reinstated pending a decision of this Court. It is the latter order that the plaintiff seeks to have stayed by a writ of prohibition.

Prohibition is an extraordinary writ, the purpose of which is to prevent subordinate courts or other tribunals, officers or persons from usurping or exercising jurisdiction with which they are not vested. The grant of such a writ is within the discretion of this court and should be used with caution and forbearance and then only when the right to relief is clear. See 73 C. J. S., Prohibition, *ss.*2 & 5.

While it is true that we will not deny relief in a proper case merely because of the form of remedy sought, neither will we interfere by extraordinary action with the ordinary process of appeal unless there is a clear case of necessity.

Aside from the temporary reinstatement order the proceedings in the Superior Court are not now before us, but from what has been represented to us by counsel, we cannot say that the subject matter is clearly outside the jurisdiction of that court. The order complained of merely preserves the *status quo*pending appeal and it does not appear that any irreparable harm will result from the order. We therefore decline to interfere with it in advance of a hearing on the merits.

*Petition denied.*

Iampron, J., did not sit.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BRIAN STANLEY WITTMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROSEMARY REAUME, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

Case Number: 2:14-CV-12421

HONORABLE GERSHWIN A. DRAIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION

TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES AND COSTS AND

DISMISSING THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff Brian Stanley Wittman, a state prisoner currently confined at the Carson City

Correctional Facility in Carson City, Michigan, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an application to proceed without prepaying the fees and

costs for the civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Although Plaintiff allegedly lacks funds to pay the filing fee for this action, he had a

current spendable balance of $804.12 in his prison account as of June 18, 2014 when an

administrative officer at the prison certified his financial statement. Moreover, the Court

notes that the government provides Plaintiff with food, clothing, and shelter such that

requiring payment of the filing fee for this action will not force him to go without necessary

incidentals. See Lyon v. Krol, 127 F.3d 763, 765 (8th Cir. 1997). The Court concludes

from the financial data before it that Plaintiff has not established indigence and that he

should be able to prepay the filing fee for this action.

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's application to proceed without the

2:14-cv-12421-GAD-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 07/09/14 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 24
prepayment of fees and costs and DISMISSES the complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

Plaintiff may refile his complaint as a new action with payment of the $350.00 filing fee and

administrative fee of $50.00 (for a total of $400.00). The Court makes no determination as

to the merits of the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Gershwin A Drain 

GERSHWIN A. DRAIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: July 9, 2014

2

2:14-cv-12421-GAD-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 07/09/14 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 25
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-88,805-01 & -02 & -03 & -04

EX PARTE ANTHONY SCOTT GARCIA CORRO, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. CR-4545-08-B(1) & CR-3481-09-B(1) & CR-4927-09-B(1) & CR-3695-07-B(1)

IN THE 93 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FROM HIDALGO COUNTY RD

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex

parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of

manufacturing and delivery of a controlled substance and aggravated assault with serious bodily

injury and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment in each count. Applicant was also convicted of

possession of a prohibited substance in a correctional facility and aggravated assault and sentenced

to eight years’ imprisonment in each count, with all sentences to run concurrent. Applicant did not

appeal his convictions.

In four related grounds, Applicant alleges that his pleas were involuntary. 
On January 30, 2018, a timely order designating issues was signed by the trial court. The

habeas records were then properly forwarded to this Court pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 73.4 (b)(5),

but without the designated issues being resolved by the trial court. We remand these applications 1

to the 93 Judicial District Court of Hidalgo County to allow the trial judge to complete an rd

evidentiary investigation and enter findings of fact and conclusions of law.

These applications will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. 

The issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall

be obtained from this Court. 

Filed: September 12, 2018

Do not publish 

 Under TEX. R. APP. P. 73.5, a trial court may request an extension of time to resolve 1

designated issues by filing a motion before the expiration of 180 days from the date of the receipt

of the application by the State.