alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1



 





          Exhibit  10.1 Resolution of the Board of Directors adopted January 14, 2005.



     RESOLVED that, in lieu of the annual grant of options previously approved by this Board of
Directors, non-executive Directors shall be entitled to receive a retainer of $10,000 per annum,
payable $2,500 quarterly commencing on April 1, 2005 to each individual serving as a non-executive
Director on the last day of the calendar quarter immediately preceding the payment date; and be it



     FURTHER RESOLVED, that the fees and reimbursement of expenses for attendance at board and
committee meetings continue as previously approved; and be it



     FURTHER RESOLVED, that these resolutions shall continue in full force and effect until
modified or rescinded by this or any future Board of Directors of the Company.
# C_2013252EN.01004902.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/49

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 18 June 2013 — Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa v Parliament

(Case F-114/11) (1)

1

(Civil Service - Remuneration - Family allowances - Education allowance - Conditions for grant - Deduction of an allowance of the same type received from another source - Action manifestly unfounded)

2013/C 252/88

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: João Manuel Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa (Kehlen, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Ecker and V. Montebello-Bemogeot, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Civil Service — Action for annulment of the decision of the Parliament to consider certain financial aid from a Member State to students in higher education to be allowances of the same nature as family allowances and to deduct that financial aid from the education allowance granted to the applicant and annulment of the decision to seek repayment of sums unduly paid.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action brought by Mr Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa is dismissed as manifestly unfounded in law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action brought by Mr Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa is dismissed as manifestly unfounded in law.

| 2. | Mr Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa shall bear his own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Rodrigues Regalo Corrêa shall bear his own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012, p. 28.

1

---
§ 159.005-3 Application for preapproval review. ( a ) Each manufacturer of equipment or material who seeks Coast Guard approval under an applicable subpart must submit an application that meets § 159.005-5 to the Commandant unless— ( 1 ) The subpart contains a list of independent laboratories;
( 2 ) The subpart does not require Coast Guard review prior to testing; and
( 3 ) The manufacturer meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) If the applicable subpart contains a list of independent laboratories and does not specifically require preapproval review by the Coast Guard, the manufacturer may have the tests performed by a listed laboratory and submit the report required by § 159.005-11 to the Commandant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Brandy Taylor,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 14-13893

Commissioner of Social Security, Sean F. Cox

United States District Court Judge

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER 

ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING 

 REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff filed this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s determination

that her minor son is not entitled to Social Security benefits.

The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Mona Majzoub for determination of all nondispositive motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Report and Recommendation pursuant

to § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C). 

In a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on April 30, 2015, Magistrate Judge

Majzoub recommends that this matter be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. 

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a

matter by a Magistrate Judge must filed objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after

being served with a copy of the R&R. “The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall

make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the

magistrate judge’s disposition to which specific written objection has been made.” Id. 

No party has filed objections to the R&R and the time permitted for filing objections to

1

2:14-cv-13893-SFC-MKM Doc # 18 Filed 05/20/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 395
the R&R has passed.

The Court hereby ADOPTS the April 30, 2015 Report and Recommendation. IT IS

ORDERED that this action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO

PROSECUTE. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 20, 2015 S/ Sean F. Cox 

Sean F. Cox

U. S. District Judge

I hereby certify that on May 20, 2015, the foregoing document was served on counsel of record

via electronic means and upon Brandy Taylor via First Class mail at the address below:

Brandy Taylor 

4012 Fullerton 

Detroit, MI 48238 

S/ J. McCoy 

Case Manager 

2

2:14-cv-13893-SFC-MKM Doc # 18 Filed 05/20/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 396
#### Sec. 13 Insurance.

Article 9 of the NSA-LUMPSUMREP Contract sets forth the Contractor's liabilities and obligations with respect to awarded work. Said Article 9 requires that the Contractor shall maintain insurance to cover such liabilities and obligations. Evidence of such insurance shall be submitted to the Chief, Division of Insurance, Washington, DC, by the contractors for approval.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2282 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to reauthorize the State 

Criminal Alien Assistance Program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 6, 2009 

Mr. KING of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 

reauthorize the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SCAAP REAUTHORIZED. 

4 Section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended— 

6 (1) by amending paragraph (4)(A) to read as 

7 follows: 

8 ‘‘(4)(A) In carrying out paragraph (1), the Sec9 retary of Homeland Security shall give priority to— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2282 IH

1 ‘‘(i) Federal incarceration of undocu2 mented criminal aliens who have committed ag3 gravated felonies; and 

4 ‘‘(ii) compensating States, and political 

5 subdivisions of States— 

6 ‘‘(I) located on a border of the United 

7 States with Canada or Mexico; or 

8 ‘‘(II) having one of the fifth largest 

9 populations of aliens who are not author10 ized to be present in the United States.’’; 

11 and 

12 (2) by amending paragraph (5) to read as fol13 lows: 

14 ‘‘(5) There are authorized to be appropriated 

15 $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 

16 through 2014 to carry out this subsection.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
#### John T. McGovern, as Executor of Catherine McGovern, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*Supreme Council, Catholic Benevolent Legion, Appellant.

*McGovern*v. *Supreme*Council, *C. B. L,,*134 App. Div. 686, appeal dismissed.

(Submitted February 7, 1910;

decided February 15, 1910.)

Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 1, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover upon a policy of life insurance.

The motion was made upon the grounds that the appeal was frivolous, unwarranted and interposed for delay.

*John T. McGovern*for motion.

*John C. McGuire*opposed.

Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
balance sheet of Lucent at September 30, 1996 and the consolidated statement of
operations for the nine-month period ended September 30, 1996 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           2,241
<SECURITIES>                                     1,834
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,187
<ALLOWANCES>                                       273
<INVENTORY>                                      3,288
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,781
<PP&E>                                          11,020
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,333
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,713
<BONDS>                                          1,623
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                6
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,680
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,626
<SALES>                                         15,859
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,859
<CGS>                                            9,290
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,290
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,082
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    54
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    367
<INCOME-TAX>                                       143
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                224
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       224
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
RICHARD E. ZALDIVAR, P.A., FORMER COUNSEL FOR EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT

, Appellant,

v.

DYKE INDUSTRIES, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL AND ALAIN DEBESA

, Appellee s

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 1529

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 8, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims

. Charles M. Hill, III , Judge

. Date of Accident: January 13, 2014.

Kimberly A. Hill of Kimberly A. Hill, P.L., Fort Lauderdale, and Albert Marroquin of Richard E. Zaldivar, P.A., Miami , for Appellant.

Edward C. Duncan, III, of the Law Offices of Amy L. Warpinski, Fort Myers , for Appellee s

.

PER CURIAM.

Based on Castellanos v. Next Door Co.

, 124 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013),

we AFFIRM. In so doing, we certify that our di sposition of the instant case passes2 upon the same question we certified in Castellanos

. Id. at 394. See Jollie v. State

, 405 So. 2d 418, 421 n.* (Fla. 1981).

THOMAS, MARSTILLER, and KELSEY

, J J

. , CONCUR.
**EXHIBIT
      32**




**CERTIFICATION**




By
      signing below, each of the
      undersigned officers hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his or
      her
      knowledge, (i) this report fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information
      contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of Lincoln
      Bancorp.




Signedthis
      8th day of August,
      2007.




CHIEF
                FINANCIAL
                OFFICER:
            
            CHIEF
                EXECUTIVE
                OFFICER:By:
            /s/
                John M.
                Baer
            
            By:
            /s/
                Jerry R.
                EngleJohn
                M.
                Baer
            
            
            Jerry
                R.
                EngleSecretary
                and
                Treasurer
            
            
            President
                and Chief Executive
                Officer














A
      signed original of this written
      statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
      acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
      within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section
      906,
      has been provided to Lincoln Bancorp and will be retained by Lincoln Bancorp
      and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

_____________________________________________________________________

 

LORI ANNE CHRISTMANN,

 

Petitioner, 

v. Case No. 14-14732

WILLIAM SCHUTTE,

Respondent.

_______________________________________/

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the court’s “Opinion and Order Denying Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus, Granting Certificate of Appealability, Granting Application to Proceed in

Forma Pauperis, and Granting Permission to Proceed on Appeal in Forma Pauperis”

dated May 13, 2015,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is entered in favor of

Respondent William Schutte and against Petitioner Lori Anne Christmann. Dated at

Detroit, Michigan, this 13th day of May 2015.

 DAVID J. WEAVER

 CLERK OF THE COURT

S/ Lisa Wagner 

By: Lisa Wagner, Case Manager

 to Judge Robert H. Cleland

2:14-cv-14732-RHC-MKM Doc # 7 Filed 05/13/15 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 56
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

CHARLES W. JOHNSTON,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2908 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 111 DB 2022

Attorney Registration No. 15621

(Cumberland County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8 th day of March , 2023

, upon consideration of the Verified

Statement of Resignation, Charles W. Johnston is disbarred on consent from the Bar of

this Commonwealth. See Pa.R.D.E. 215. Respondent shall comply with the provisions

of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board

. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**1298 CA 13-00767**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

DARRYL GAITER AND HELEN GAITER, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CITY OF BUFFALO BOARD OF EDUCATION AND MARTIN LUTHER KING SCHOOL #39, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

TIMOTHY A. BALL, CORPORATION COUNSEL, BUFFALO (DAVID M. LEE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

LAW OFFICE OF ERIC B. GROSSMAN, WILLIAMSVILLE (ERIC B. GROSSMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy J. Drury, J.), entered February 4, 2013. The order awarded plaintiffs money damages after a nonjury trial.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: On appeal from an order awarding damages to plaintiffs in this personal injury action, defendants contend that the award of damages deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation ( see CPLR 5501 [c]). We must dismiss the appeal because defendants failed to include the “partial judgments,” i.e., relevant and necessary documents of the record, in the record on appeal ( see Copp v Ramirez , 62 AD3d 23, 28, lv denied 12 NY3d 711; Desmarat v Basile , 288 AD2d 336, 337; Reiss v Reiss , 280 AD2d 315, 315). In any event, defendants’ contention is not preserved for our review ( see Homan v Herzig [appeal No. 2], 55 AD3d 1413, 1413-1414; see also Barnes v Dellapenta , 111 AD3d 1287, 1288).

Entered: February 6, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# CE2009285EN.01012501.xml

| 26.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 285/125 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 285/125

---

Thursday 5 June 2008Prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyreostatic action and of beta agonists ***I

P6_TA(2008)0251

European Parliament legislative resolution of 5 June 2008 on the proposal for a directive of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 96/22/EC concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyreostatic action and of beta-agonists (COM(2007)0292 — C6-0154/2007 — 2007/0102(COD))

2009/C 285 E/21

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0292),

having regard to Articles 251(2) and 152(4)(b) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0154/2007),

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A6-0067/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

---

Thursday 5 June 2008P6_TC1-COD(2007)0102

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 5 June 2008 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2008/.../EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 96/22/EC concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyreostatic action and of beta-agonists

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2008/97/EC.)

---
# C_2013046EN.01003102.xml

| 16.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/31

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 23 October 2012 — Possanzini v Frontex

(Case F-61/11) (1)

1

(Civil service - Temporary staff - Procedure relating to the renewal of a temporary staff contract - Communication to the staff member of the negative opinion of the reporting officer as regards renewal - Act adversely affecting an official - None - Application for annulment of unfavourable comments on performance in annual appraisal reports - Action manifestly inadmissible)

2013/C 46/61

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Daniele Possanzini (Warsaw, Poland)) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) (represented by: S. Vuorensola and H. Caniard, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Civil Service — Application for annulment of the decision to revoke the decision to renew the applicant’s contract of employment as a member of the temporary staff and for annulment of some parts of his assessment reports for the period from August 2006 to December 2009

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | Mr Possanzini shall bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Possanzini shall bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 226, 30.7.2011, p. 32.

1

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            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 First Capital, Inc. and Subsidiaries
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, William W.
Harrod, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(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 as of
and for the period covered by the Report.


DATE:  November 13, 2002                BY:   /s/ William W. Harrod
       ------------------                     ---------------------
                                              William W. Harrod
                                              President and Chief
                                                Executive Officer
                                              (Principal Executive Officer)
Editorial Note on Part 164
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 164 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59787, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 164.019-1 Scope. ( a ) This subpart contains general requirements for standard personal flotation device (PFD) components, procedures for acceptance of non-standard PFD components, and production quality control requirements for all PFD components, used in the construction of PFDs approved under part 160 of this subchapter.
( b ) Other subparts of this part contain specific requirements applicable to particular PFD components used in the construction of Coast Guard-approved PFDs.
( c ) Part 160 of this chapter contains specific requirements and limitations concerning the use of PFD components in the construction of particular Coast Guard-approved PFDs.