alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w31



 






EXHIBIT 10.31




NORTEL NETWORKS LIMITED

MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

DECEMBER 18, 2003










* * * EXTRACT * * *




Remuneration of Chairman of the Board



     RESOLVED, That the annual compensation to be paid to Mr. L.R. Wilson for his services
as Chairman of the Board of the Corporation and Nortel Networks Corporation (“NNC”) shall be
increased from US$360,000 per year to US$400,000 per year, effective January 1, 2004;



Directors’ Remuneration



     RESOLVED, That, effective January 1, 2004, each Director of the Corporation who is not
a salaried employee of the Corporation, NNC, or any of its or their subsidiaries (each a “Nortel
Networks Company”), shall receive an annual Board retainer of US$60,000;



     RESOLVED, That, effective January 1, 2004, each member of a Board Committee who is not
a salaried employee of a Nortel Networks Company, shall be paid remuneration for services, as a
member of each Board Committee on which the member sits a retainer fee at the rate of US$12,500 per
annum; except that a retainer fee at the rate of US$6,250 per annum shall be paid to any member of
a Board Committee who is also a member of an identical committee of the NNC Board of Directors;



     RESOLVED, That, effective January 1, 2004, any Chairman of a Board Committee (other
than the Audit Committee Chairman), who is not a salaried employee of a Nortel Networks Company,
shall be paid, in addition to the member’s retainer, a retainer fee at the rate of US$12,500 per
annum, except that an additional retainer fee at the rate of US$6,250 per annum shall be paid to
any Chairman of a Board Committee (other than the Audit Committee Chairman) who is also Chairman of
an identical committee of the NNC Board of Directors;



     RESOLVED, That, effective January 1, 2004, the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the
Board of Directors shall be paid, in addition to the member’s retainer, a retainer fee at the rate
of US$27,500 per annum, except that an additional retainer fee of US$13,750 per annum shall be paid
to the Chairman of the Audit Committee if he or she is also chairman of the Audit Committee of the
NNC Board of Directors;



     RESOLVED, That the Directors entitled to the remuneration provided for in the
preceding resolutions shall be reimbursed for the reasonable travel and living and



 









 







other expenses properly incurred by them in attending any meeting of the Board of Directors or its
Committees, or for performing services as Directors;



     RESOLVED, That the remuneration provided for in these resolutions shall be paid
quarterly, in arrears, in United States dollars or, at the request of a Director, in the Canadian
dollar equivalent thereof;



     RESOLVED, That, for greater certainty, Directors shall not be paid an additional fee
for attendance at Board of Directors or Committee meetings;
May 30 , 2013.



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals
JACQUELYN A. HINOJOS A , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00163

- CV V.

TEXAS WINDMILL APART MENTS, LP D/B/A R OYAL OAKS OF PEARLAND and NEWPORT ASSET MANAGE MENT, INC. , Appellee s

________________________________ Today the Court heard appellant’ s agreed motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on February 1, 2013. Having considered
t he motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that each party shall pay its costs by reason of this appeal. We further order that mandate be issued immediately. We further order this decision certified below for obs ervance.
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
Data Series 525
EAARL Coastal       Topography�Gateway National Recreation Area, New Jersey and New York,       2009
Collaborators

Funding for this project was provided by       the U.S. Geological Survey - Coastal and Marine       Geology Program and by the NPS - Northeast Coastal and Barrier       Network.

U.S. Geological Survey

Coastal and             Marine Geology Program

St. Petersburg Coastal and             Marine Science Center

National Park             Service

Inventory and Monitoring Program

Northeast Coastal and Barrier Network

National Aeronautics             and Space Administration

Wallops Flight Facility

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey URL: pubs.usgs.gov /ds/525/html/collaborators.htmlPage Contact Information: FeedbackPage Last Modified: Friday, 27-Aug-2010 09:50:51 EDT
§ 163.002-11 Materials. ( a ) *Gears.* Each gear in a pilot hoist must be made of machine cut steel or machine cut bronze, or must be of a design of equivalent strength, durability, reliability and accuracy.
( b ) *Suspension cables.* Each suspension cable on a pilot hoist must be a corrosion-resistant wire rope other than galvanized wire rope.
( c ) *Corrosion-resistant materials.* Materials of a pilot hoist that are not in watertight enclosures must be— ( 1 ) Corrosion-resistant or must be treated to be corrosion-resistant; and
( 2 ) Galvanically compatible with each other adjoining material.
( d ) *Aluminum alloys.* Any aluminum alloy which is not resistant to stress corrosion in marine atmospheres (i.e., contains more than 0.6 percent copper), must not be used in a structural component or in any other hoist component subject to stress.
#### Frank P. Shean, *Respondent, v.*Heman P. Matthews, *Appellant*.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied with ten dollars costs. Mem. by

Learned, P. J.
# C_2012073EN.01001702.xml

| 10.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/17

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium) lodged on 21 December 2011 — Belgian Electronic Sorting Technology NV v Bert Peelaers and Visys NV

(Case C-657/11)

2012/C 73/31

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Belgian Electronic Sorting Technology

Defendants:

| | Bert Peelaers |
| --- | --- |

Bert Peelaers

| | Visys NV |
| --- | --- |

Visys NV

Question referred

Question referred

Is the term ‘advertising’ in Article 2 of Council Directive 84/450/EEC (1) of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising and in Article 2 of Directive 2006/114/EC (2) of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising to be interpreted as encompassing, on the one hand, the registration and use of a domain name and, on the other, the use of metatags in a website’s metadata?

1

2

---

(1)  OJ L 250, p. 17.

1

(2)  OJ L 376, p. 21.

2

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Peter E. Williams III, Acting Chief Financial Officer of Saba Software, Inc. (the Company) hereby certify, as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2003 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.



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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                     |  |     |  |                                                     
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 14, 2004 |  |     |  |                                                     
|                     |  | By: |  | /s/ Peter E. Williams III                           
|                     |  |     |  | Peter E. Williams III Acting Chief Financial Officer
##### 



MATRIA HEALTHCARE, INC. SUBSIDIARIES
March 8, 2006
 Jurisdiction ofName
    
    IncorporationMatria Health Enhancement Company
    
    DelawareQuality Oncology, Inc.
    
    DelawareMatria Case Management, Inc. (d/b/a Options
Unlimited)
    
    GeorgiaMiavita, Inc.
    
    GeorgiaWinningHabits, Inc.
    
    DelawareWinningHabits GP, Inc.
    
    DelawareWinningHabits LP, Inc.
    
    DelawareWinningHabits.com, Ltd.
    
    TexasCorSolutions Medical, Inc.
    
    DelawareCorSolutions, Inc.
    
    DelawareHealth and Productivity Corporation of
America, Inc.
    
    DelawareMatria Womens and Childrens Health, LLC (formerly
Matria Healthcare, Inc.)
    
    DelawareMatria of New York, Inc.
    
    New YorkMatria Healthcare of Illinois, Inc.
    
    Georgia*National Reproductive Medical Centers, Inc.
    
    Delaware*Infertility Management Services, Inc.
    
    Delaware*PFCC Liquidation Corp. (formerly Pacific
Fertility Centers of California, Inc.)
    
    California*PFMG Liquidation Corp. (formerly
Pacific Fertility Medical Group, Inc.)
    
    California*PFPC Liquidation Corp. (formerly Pacific
Fertility Parenting Center, Inc.)
    
    CaliforniaDiabetes Acquisition, Inc.
    
    GeorgiaGainor Medical Acquisition Company
    
    GeorgiaDiabetes Management Solutions, Inc. (formerly
USCI Healthcare Management Solutions, Inc.)
    
    Delaware*Diabetes Self Care, Inc.
    
    Virginia*Matria Laboratories, Inc.
    
    DelawareMatria Holding GmbH
    
    Germany (LLC)(65% held by Diabetes Acquisition, Inc.,
35% by Matria Healthcare, Inc.)eu-Medical GmbH
    
    Germany (LLC)Dia Real GmbH & Co. KG
    
    Germany (LLC)Facet Technologies, LLC (formerly Gainor Medical
North America, L.L.C.)
    
    GeorgiaFacet Technologies Limited (formerly Gainor
Medical United Kingdom Europe Limited)
    
    United KingdomMHI Insurance Ltd.
    
    Vermont*Shared Care, Inc.
    
    Georgia
 
 *
    
    Inactive Note
#### JOHN N. HARTUNG ET AL., PROSECUTORS, v. JOHN J. McGOVERN, CLERK OF HUDSON COUNTY ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Argued November 14, 1929

Decided November 21, 1929.

Before Justices Trenci-iabd, Lloyd and Case.

Eor the prosecutors, *William E. Declcer.*

Eor the respondents, *J. Emil Walscheid.*

Per Curiam.

The applicants seek to review the order of the Supreme Court justice in allowing compensation to the members of the county board of elections for making a recount of the ballots ordered by such justice. In support of such application it is contended that there is no legal authority for *1071such allowance of compensation. To us it is quite plain that there is such authority, and it is to be found in paragraph 422 of the election laws as compiled by the secretary of state edition 1929. Our examination of that statute, and considering its history, satisfies us that the statutory language is too plain to render the question suggested open to fair debate. The result of course is that the writ is denied, with costs on the motion.
§ 108.181 Ventilation for enclosed spaces. ( a ) Each enclosed space must be vented or ventilated.
( b ) There must be a means to close each vent or ventilating system.
( c ) Each fan in a ventilating system must have remote controls installed in accordance with part 111, subpart 111.103, of this chapter.
( d ) There must be a means to close each doorway, ventilator, and annular space around each funnel or other opening to machinery, stowage, or working spaces. The means must be located outside the space.
( e ) Each intake in a ventilating system must be located so as to prevent, as far as practicable, the intake of noxious fumes.
[CGD 73-251, 43 FR 56808, Dec. 4, 1978, as amended by CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28270, June 4, 1996]
§ 169.513 Types of primary equipment. ( a ) *Lifeboats.* Each lifeboat must be of a type approved under subpart 160.035 of this chapter. Installation and arrangement of each lifeboat including davits and winches must meet the requirements of part 94 of this chapter.
( b ) *Inflatable liferafts.* ( 1 ) Each inflatable liferaft must be a SOLAS A inflatable liferaft approved under part 160, subpart 160.151, of this chapter, except that inflatable liferafts on vessels operating on protected or partially protected waters may be SOLAS B inflatable liferafts approved under part 160, subpart 160.151, of this chapter.
( 2 ) Each approved inflatable liferaft on the vessel on September 30, 2002, may be used to meet the requirements of this part as long as it is continued in use on the vessel, and is in good and serviceable condition.
( c ) *Life floats.* Each lifefloat must be of a type approved under subpart 160.027 of this subchapter.
[CGD 83-005, 51 FR 896, Jan. 9, 1986, as amended by USCG-2001-11118, 67 FR 58541, Sept. 17, 2002]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6751
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TOMMY LINDSEY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-53-7, CA-96-939-F) Submitted: October 21, 1997 Decided: November 12, 1997 Before HALL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tommy Lindsey, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jackson, Assistant United States Attorney, Bruce Charles Johnson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Lindsey , Nos. CR-93-53-7; CA-96-939-F (E.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# C_2012089EN.01002401.xml

| 24.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/24

---

Order of the General Court of 10 February 2012 — AG v Parliament

(Case T-98/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Dismissal at the end of the probationary period - Time-limit for bringing action - Lateness - Appeal clearly unfounded)

2012/C 89/39

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: AG (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: S. Seyr and V. Montebello-Demogeot, agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 16 December 2010 in Case F-25/10 AG v Parliament, not yet reported in the ECR, seeking to have that order set aside.

AG

Parliament

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal as dismissed as clearly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal as dismissed as clearly unfounded.

| 2. | AG is ordered to pay, apart from its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

AG is ordered to pay, apart from its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 120, 16.4.2011.

1

---
§ 178.430 Drainage of well deck vessels. ( a ) The weather deck on a well deck vessel must be watertight.
( b ) The area required on a well deck vessel for drainage of well formed by the bulwarks shall be determined by § 178.450.
( c ) The freeing ports or scuppers on a well deck vessel must be located to allow rapid clearing of water in all probable conditions of list and trim.
( d ) The deck of well deck vessel that operates on exposed or partially protected waters must be at least 255 millimeters (10 inches) above the deepest load waterline unless the vessel complies with: ( 1 ) The intact stability requirements of §§ 170.170, 170.173, 171.050, 171.055, and 171.057 in subchapter S of this chapter;
( 2 ) The Type II subdivision requirements in §§ 171.070, 171.072, and 171.073 in subchapter S of this chapter; and
( 3 ) The damage stability requirements in § 171.080 in subchapter S of this chapter.
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.051-5 Incorporation by reference. ( a ) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved incorporation by reference (IBR) material is available for inspection at Coast Guard Headquarters and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact the Coast Guard at: Commandant (CG-ENG-4), U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20593-7509; or email *typeapproval@uscg.mil* or visit *https://www.dco.uscg.mil/CG-ENG-4/ .* For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email: *fr.inspection@nara.gov ,* or go to: *www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html .* The material may be obtained from the source in the following paragraph of this section.
( b ) International Maritime Organization (IMO) Publications Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, + 44 (0)20 7735 7611, *http://www.imo.org/ .* ( 1 ) Life-Saving Appliances, including LSA Code, 2010 Edition, (2010), pages 7-71 (“IMO LSA Code”), IBR approved for §§ 160.051-7 and 160.051-9.
( 2 ) Life-Saving Appliances, including LSA Code, 2010 Edition, (2010), Revised recommendation on testing of live-saving appliances, pages 79-254 (“IMO Revised recommendation on testing”), IBR approved for §§ 160.051-7 and 160.051-11.
[USCG-2010-0048, 76 FR 62975, Oct. 11, 2011, as amended by USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60157, Sept. 30, 2013; USCG-2022-0323, 88 FR 10030, Feb. 16, 2023]
#### § 185.900 Penalty for violations.

Violation of the provisions of this subchapter will subject the violator to the applicable penalty provisions of Subtitle II of Title 46, United States Code.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Grand Central Financial Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, John A. Rife,
Executive Vice President and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of
                  operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.





                                    -------------------------
                                    John A. Rife
                                    Executive Vice President and Treasurer
                                    November 13, 2002
#### § 188.10-39 Lakes, bays, and sounds.

Under this designation shall be included all vessels navigating the waters of any of the lakes, bays, or sounds, other than the waters of the Great Lakes.
EX-10.1



 





Exhibit 10.1




Description of Annual Incentive and Long-Term Incentive Bonus Awards




          CT Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains an annual incentive discretionary bonus plan
(the “annual incentive plan”) and long-term incentive discretionary bonus plan (the “long-term
incentive plan”) for the benefit of its executive officers, other officers and certain other key
employees of the Company. The annual incentive plan and the long-term incentive plan are
administered and paid out under the Company’s Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan.




          The annual incentive award may be paid each year based on goals established and approved by
the Company’s Compensation Committee. Potential bonuses are specified as a percentage of the
employees’ annual base salary. For 2004, the annual incentive award will be based on a combination
of financial and operational objectives. Such objectives are: operating revenue; operating
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; operating free cash flow; aggregate
net customer growth in the Company’s ILEC, CLEC, Greenfield, Wireless and DSL businesses; and
aggregate customer disconnects in the Company’s ILEC, CLEC, Greenfield, Wireless and DSL
businesses. The annual incentive award consists of 75% cash and 25% restricted common stock. The
restricted common stock portion of the annual incentive award vests one year from the award date.




          The Company, as authorized by the Compensation Committee, may also pay a long-term incentive
award based on a three-year performance period with performance goals established at the beginning
of the cycle. Potential bonuses are specified as a percentage of the employees’ annual base
salary. For the 2002 to 2004 performance period, the long-term incentive award is based on growth
rates for key financial measurements. Such measurements are: operating revenue; operating
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; earnings per share and total
shareholder return (compared to a peer stock index). The long-term incentive award consists of 50%
cash and 50% restricted common stock. The restricted common stock portion of the long-term
incentive award vests two years from the award date. The price that is used to calculate the
number of shares of restricted stock issued will be 90% of the average closing NASDAQ price for all
trading days in the month of December at the end of the applicable performance period.




          In addition to the annual and long-term incentive compensation, compensation for executive
officers may include additional awards of nonqualified and/or incentive stock options issued under
the Company’s Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan.
----

Note that some of the high-backscatter features shown in 21B are mounds witha relief of 1 - 3 m.

----

----

----

SusanA. Cochran

U.S. Department of the Interior,U.S.Geological Survey,Western RegionCoastal and Marine Geology