alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Stephen J. Alesia Employment Agreement







Exhibit 10.2







January 18, 2005




Mr. Stephen J. Alesia

One Technology Way

Indianapolis, IN  46268

 




Dear Steve,

 

As CFO, Secretary and Treasurer, in the event your employment with Hurco Companies, Inc. is terminated for reasons other than gross misconduct, you are entitled to severance concessions as outlined below. 




Severance:




In the event that Hurco Companies, Inc. elects to terminate your employment for reasons other than gross misconduct or other actions that constitute “just cause” Hurco will pay you twelve months severance at your rate of salary in effect on the date you are relieved of your responsibilities.




Medical and Life Insurance:




Effective with your employment termination, Hurco will provide you with a lump sum payment, subject to all applicable taxes, sufficient to maintain twelve months of personal medical and life insurance coverage.




Voluntary Resignation:




In the event you voluntarily resign your employment with Hurco Companies, Inc., Hurco will not be obligated to provide you with any severance payments or other benefits.

 




Very truly yours,




/s/ Michael Doar





Michael Doar

Chief Executive Officer







ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:







/s/ Stephen J. Alesia    January 18, 2005

Stephen J. Alesia        Date
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

# ACTION:

Announcement of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the 13th meeting of the American Health Information Community in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.). The American Health Information Community will advise the Secretary and recommend specific actions to achieve a common interoperability framework for health information technology (IT).

# DATES:

April 24, 2007, from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. (EDT)

# ADDRESSES:

Hubert H. Humphrey building (200 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201), Conference Room 800.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Visit                         *http://www.hhs.gov/​healthit/​ahic.html.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting will include presentations by the Electronic Health Records and Chronic Care Workgroups on Recommendations and an update, as well as reports from the National Governors Association's State Alliance Task Force and a report on the First Year of the Nationwide Health Information Network (NHIN) initiative.

                    A Web cast of the Community meeting will be available on the NIH                           ( print page 17917)                        Web site at:                     *http://www.videocast.nih.gov/​*.                

If you have special needs for the meeting, please contact (202) 690-7151.

Dated: April 2, 2007.

Judith Sparrow, 

Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

[FR Doc. 07-1762  Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-24-M
# C_2014388EN.01000901.xml

| 3.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 388/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2014 — Ipatau v Council

(Case T-646/11) (1)

1

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Belarus - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Restrictions on the entry into and transit through the European Union - Action for annulment - Time-limit for instituting proceedings - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Error of assessment))

2014/C 388/09

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Vadzim Ipatau (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: M. Michalauskas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Naert and B. Driessen, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment of Council Decision 2011/666/CFSP of 10 October 2011 amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2011 L 265, p. 17), in so far as it concerns the applicant, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1000/2011 of 10 October 2011 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2011 L 265, p. 8) in so far as it concerns the applicant, the Council decision of 14 November 2011 rejecting the applicant’s request to have his name removed from Council Decision 2011/69/CFSP of 31 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus (OJ 2011 L 28, p. 40) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 84/2011 of 31 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus (OJ 2011 L 28, p. 17), and annulment of Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2012 L 285, p. 1) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1017/2012 of 6 November 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2012 L 307, p. 7), in so far they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Vadzim Ipatau to bear, in addition to his own costs, the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Vadzim Ipatau to bear, in addition to his own costs, the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 258, 25.8.2012.

1

---
Maps of the

Federal Reserve System
The Federal Reserve System

Note

The Federal Reserve officially identifies

Districts by number and by Reserve

Bank city (shown on both pages) and by

letter (shown on the facing page).

In the 12th District, the Seattle

Branch serves Alaska, and the San Francisco Bank serves Hawaii.

The System serves commonwealths

and territories as follows: The New York

Bank serves the Commonw

Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgi

the San Francisco Bank serv

can Samoa, Guam, and the 

wealth of the Northern Marian

The maps show the boundar

the System as of year-end 200

CHICAGO

K C ANSAS ITY

HAWAII

ALASKA

MINNEAPOLIS

DALLAS

S F AN RANCISCO

S L T. OUIS

CLEVELAND

RICHMON

ATLANTA

PHIL

10

12

11

9

8

6

7

2

3

5

4

Legend

Both pages Facing page

Federal Reserve Bank city • Federal Reserve Branch ci

Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, Washington, D.C.

Branch boundary
NM

NH

CT

AR

New Orleans

Miami

PA

OH

WV

KY

PA NJ

DE

NY

NY NJ

MA

RI

ME

VT

CT

GA

AL

FL

MS

TN

LA

MO

IL 

MS

IN

WI

MI

IA

IL

CA

OR

NV

WA

HAWAII

ALASKA

ND

MT

SD

WI

MN

MI

TX

LA

NM

CO

WY

NE

MO

KS

OK

10–J

1–A 2–B 3–C 4–D 5–E

7–G 8–H

9–I

11–K

12–L

6–F

BOSTON N Y EW ORK PHILADELPHIA CLEVELAND RICH

CHICAGO S L T. O

MINNEAPOLIS

K C ANSAS ITY

DALLAS S F AN RANCISCO

ATLANTA

Cincinnati

Pittsburgh

Buffalo

Birmingham

Jacksonville

Nashville

Little

Rock

M

Detroit

Seattle

Portland

Los Angeles

Sal

Helena

San Antonio

Houston El Paso

Omaha

Denver

Oklahoma City

WV

S

Ba
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON



### O RDER 

### D ENYING 

### M OTION FOR 

### R EHEARING

Cause number s and style: 01

– 1 2

– 0 09 95

- C R ; Richard v. State

Date motion filed: July 22, 2013

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that appellant’s m otion for r ehearing is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

Justice’ s signature: /s/ Laura Carter Higley

Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Bland.

Date: July 30, 2013
§ 169.640 General. ( a ) Vital piping systems, as defined in § 169.642 of this subpart, must meet the material and pressure design requirements of Subchapter F of this chapter.
( b ) Except as provided in this paragraph, nonmetallic piping system materials must meet the applicable requirements of 46 CFR 56.60-25. ( 1 ) Rigid nonmetallic materials are acceptable for use in bilge, ballast, and machinery-connected piping systems on vessels less than 120 feet in length, provided that bilge and fire systems do not use the same piping.
( 2 ) Nonmetallic piping is prohibited in fuel systems except where flexible hose is permitted.
( 3 ) Rigid nonmetallic materials may be used in non-vital systems.
# C_2012373EN.01001301.xml

| 1.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 373/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 373/13

---

Order of the General Court of 18 October 2012 — Preparados Alimenticios del Sur v Commission

(Case T-402/11) (1)

1

2012/C 373/22

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.

1

---
(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 this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
as of and for the period covered by this Report.
 Dated:  May 14, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Mark S. AllioMark S. AllioChairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive OfficerDated:  May 14, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Therese Ann LiutkusTherese Ann Liutkus, CPATreasurer and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          25,891
<SECURITIES>                                   224,155
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,533
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,419
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               305,209
<PP&E>                                         151,617
<DEPRECIATION>                                  68,723
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 497,794
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,594
<BONDS>                                        146,642
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          220,860
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       420,515
<OTHER-SE>                                   (357,837)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   497,794
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               147,060
<CGS>                                          133,922
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   88,549
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (663)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (9,011)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (85,085)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (85,085)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,782)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.76)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT  32

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

     The undersigned, Stephen M. Siedow, the Chief Executive Officer, President
and Chief Financial Officer of Equicap, Inc. (the "Company"), DOES HEREBY
CERTIFY, that:

     1.   The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
          31, 2004 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) 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 results of operations
          of the Company.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement
this 28th day of March, 2005.


                                            By:  /s/  Stephen M. Siedow
                                               --------------------------------
                                                      Stephen M. Siedow,
                                                      Chief Executive Officer,
                                                      President and
                                                      Chief Financial Officer


     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Equicap, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or it staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CRESTLINE CAPITAL CORPORATION CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS AS OF THE TWENTY-FOUR WEEK PERIOD ENDED JUNE 18, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-18-1999
<CASH>                                          71,514
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   62,905
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         802,677
<DEPRECIATION>                                  43,032
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,037,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        379,017
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           223
<OTHER-SE>                                     454,782
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,037,022
<SALES>                                      2,054,006
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,054,006
<CGS>                                        2,002,336
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,002,336
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,692
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,641
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,740
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,423
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,317
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,317
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .88


</TABLE>
No. 6242.

#### H. A. Tracy *v.*The State.

1. Carrying a Pistol—Charge of the Court.—The information charged the appellant with carrying a pistol only, and the evidence on the trial related to the carrying of a pistol only; notwithstanding which the trial court charged the jury with reference to the carrying of a dagger, dirk, slung shot, sword cane, spear, knuckles, etc. *Held*error.

2. Same.—A charge of the court is erroneous which instructs the jury upon a phase of case not raised by the evidence on the trial.

Appeal from the County Court of Wichita. Tried below before the Hon. E. W. Foster, County Judge.

The conviction was for carrying a pistol, and the penalty assessed against the appellant was a fine of twenty-five dollars and twenty days in the county jail

*F. C. Martin*and *A. 'll. Carrigan,*for the appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Willson, Judge.

The information charges that defendant unlawfully carried upon his person a pistol. He was put upon trial upon this charge alone, and all the evidence introduced related to the carrying of no other weapon than a pistol. In *497his charge to the jury the court not only instructed with reference to a pistol, but also as to a dagger, dirk, slung shot, sword cane, spear, knuckles, etc. In fact, he gave in charge to the jury article 318 of the Penal Code, literally and entirely. Defendant promptly excepted to the charge and reserved a proper bill of exceptions.

Opinion delivered April 27, 1889.

Said charge is manifestly erroneous because, in part, it is unwarranted by the pleadings and evidence, and is not the law applicable to the case. The charge should have been confined to the specific facts—the specific weapon charged in the information, and to which the evidence related. The error having been excepted to, the judgment must be reversed.

The charge also embraces, literally and in its entirety, article 319 of the Penal Code, which is law not applicable to the evidence in the case, and which should not have been given.

The special instructions requested by the defendant are not the law applicable to the facts in evidence, and were properly refused.

Because of the error in the charge excepted to, as above stated, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

*Reversed and*remanded.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KIM L. VICTOR,

Petitioner, Case No. 14-14926

v. Hon. John Corbett O’Meara

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Respondent.

_________________________________/ 

ORDER

Before the court are Petitioner’s objections to the court’s order dismissing

her complaint. The court will construe Petitioner’s objections as a motion for

reconsideration or relief from judgment. See L.R. 7.1; Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). 

Regardless of the standard of review, Petitioner’s objections are without merit. 

Petitioner seeks a writ of coram nobis, which would serve to vacate her 2008 state

court conviction. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of

coram nobis to set aside a state court judgment, as opposed to one of its own

judgments. See Finkelstein v. Spitzer, 455 F.3d 131, 134 (2d Cir. 2006), cert.

denied, 549 U.S. 1169 (2007) (“[O]ur Sister Circuits that have addressed this

question have ruled that the district courts lack jurisdiction to issue writs of coram

nobis to set aside judgments of state courts”). As the court explained in

5:14-cv-14926-JCO-DRG Doc # 9 Filed 05/13/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 51
Finkelstein, historically, “the writ of coram nobis was used by a court to correct its

own errors.” Id. at 133. Petitioner has not cited authority to the contrary. See

Lowery v. McCaughtry, 954 F.2d 422, 423 (7th Cir. 1992) (“Lowery’s counsel

conceded that she had not found even one decision in the history of the United

States using coram nobis to set aside a judgment rendered by another court.”). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s objections to the

court’s January 14, 2015 order are DENIED.

s/John Corbett O’Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: May 13, 2015

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the

parties of record on this date, May 13, 2015, using the ECF system and/or ordinary

mail.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

-2-

5:14-cv-14926-JCO-DRG Doc # 9 Filed 05/13/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 52
#### § 169.750 Radio call sign.

Each vessel certificated for exposed or partially protected water service must have its radio call sign permanently displayed or readily available for display upon its deck or cabin top in letters at least 18 inches high.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 11 (Thursday, January 18, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 2336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-183]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee on CARES Business Plan Studies; Notice of 
Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Advisory Committee 
on CARES Business Plan Studies has scheduled a meeting on February 9, 
2007, at VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Livermore Division, Building 
90, NHCU Dining Room, 4951 Arroyo Road, Livermore, CA. The meeting will 
convene at 9 a.m. and conclude at 4:30 p.m. The meeting is open to the 
public.
    The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary 
of Veterans Affairs on proposed business plans at those VA facility 
sites identified in May 2004 as requiring further study by the Capital 
Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) Decision document.
    The objective of the meeting is to provide the Secretary with 
advice regarding the final selection of a business planning option from 
those previously selected by the Secretary for further study. An 
analysis of the business planning options completed by the VA 
contractor is to be presented prior to their submission to the VA. The 
agenda will also accommodate public commentary on the options.
    Interested persons may attend and present oral or written 
statements to the Committee. For additional information regarding the 
meeting, please contact Mr. Jay Halpern, Designated Federal Officer, 
(00CARES), at 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, by phone 
at (202) 273-5994, or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3f555e4611575e534f5a4d517f574e11525a5b11495e11585049"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e78d869ec98f868b97829589a78f96c98a8283c99186c9808891">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 10, 2007.

    By Direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 07-183 Filed 1-17-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### § 15.510 Right of appeal.

Any person directly affected by a decision or action taken under this part, by or on behalf of the Coast Guard, may appeal in accordance with subpart 1.03 of this chapter.

[CGD 88-033, 54 FR 50380, Dec. 6, 1989, as amended by USCG-2006-24412, 81 FR 40100, June 20, 2016]