alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT
                                     to the
                Employment Agreement executed September 16, 1999
                                     between
                  Roger Robb and Eagle Pacific Industries, Inc.



         THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT is entered into effective as of
this 15th day of December, 1999, by and between Roger Robb (the "Employee") and
Eagle Pacific Industries, Inc. ("Eagle").


                                   WITNESSETH:

         WHEREAS, Employee and Eagle are parties to that certain Employment
Agreement executed September 16, 1999 (the "Agreement").

         WHEREAS, the parties mutually desire to amend the Agreement effective
December 15, 1999 to take into account the resolutions adopted by Eagle's Board
of Directors at its special meeting on December 15, 1999.


         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual agreements
hereinafter contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the
parties agree as follows:


         1. Section 3.a Base Salary of the Agreement shall be changed in its
entirety to read as follows:

         "Effective as of December 15, 1999, as full compensation for the
         performance by the Employee of all of his obligations under this
         Agreement, the Employee shall be entitled to receive no less than an
         annual base salary of $170,000 payable periodically on the payroll
         schedule established for Eagle employees. Base salary shall be reviewed
         as of December 31 each year commencing with December 31, 1999, and
         based on the performance of the Employee, the business conditions of
         Eagle and the competitive market, Eagle shall determine the amount, if
         any, of any increase in base salary to be granted as of such dates."

         2. Section 3.b Annual Bonus of the Agreement shall be changed in its
entirety to read as follows:

         "The Employee and Eagle acknowledge that they are entering into this
         Agreement upon the consummation of Eagle's acquisition of Pacific
         Western Extruded Plastics Company ("PW Pipe"), and that the Employee is
         a former employee of PW Pipe. As such, for calendar year 1999 under the
         term of this Agreement, the Employee shall be entitled to a bonus equal
         to the bonus to which he would have been entitled under PW Pipe's bonus
         plan for the remainder of calendar year 1999, which shall be payable at
         such time and under such schedule as set forth under PW Pipe's bonus
         plan. For subsequent calendar years during the term of this Agreement,
         the Employee shall be entitled to participate in the Company's
         Performance Bonus Plan.

         3. Except as amended herein, the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to
Employment Agreement effective as of the date first written above.

EAGLE PACIFICS INDUSTRIES, INC.



By:     /s/ William H. Spell                            /s/ Roger Robb
Its:    Chief Executive Officer                         Roger Robb
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

MARC S. YOUNG,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5819 RBL/KLS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Karen L.

Strombom, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the remaining record, does

hereby find and ORDER:

(1) Plaintiff has failed to notify the Court of his current address in violation of

CR 41(b)(2), Local Rules W.D. Wash.

(2) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(3) Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 30) is GRANTED; and

(4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, counsel for Defendants

and to the Hon. Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 2nd day of March, 2007.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05819-RBL Document 34 Filed 03/02/07 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit
32.2
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    In
connection with this Annual Report of Red Rock Pictures Holdings Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending August 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Lorraine Evanoff, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certifies
to the best of her knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  1.
      Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ending August 31, 2008, 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 such Yearly Report
on Form 10-K for the year ending August 31, 2008, fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Red
Rock Pictures Holdings Inc.
   Dated:December
      15, 2008
  RED
ROCK PICTURES HOLDINGS INC.
  By:
      /s/ Lorraine
      EvanoffLorraine
      EvanoffPrincipal
      Accounting Officer
**1998-  milk_production_12.15.98milk_production_11.13.98milk_production_10.15.98milk_production_09.15.98milk_production_08.14.98milk_production_07.15.98milk_production_06.15.98milk_production_05.18.98milk_production_04.15.98milk_production_03.16.98milk_production_02.17.98milk_production_01.15.98

**
September 23, 1953

No. 57490.

Suit 4750.

#### H. C. Gibbs *v.*United States.

C. D. 1430 affirmed June 3, 1953. C. A. D. 529.
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.10.2


AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
This AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is made and effective as of December 6, 2017, by and between Intersections Inc. (the “Corporation”) and Johannes Jurgens Roets (“Executive”).
WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Executive entered into that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, made as of January 10, 2017 (the “Employment Agreement”);
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 4.a of the Employment Agreement, Executive is entitled to an annual salary (the “Base Salary”) of $750,000; and 
WHEREAS, the Corporation desires to pay a portion of the Base Salary for 2018 in the form of an option to purchase common stock of the Corporation; 
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows.
1.Solely for 2018, $200,000 of the Base Salary shall be paid in the form of an option (the “Option”) to purchase 238,095 shares of the Corporation’s common stock under the Corporation’s 2014 Stock Incentive Plan. The Option was granted on December 6, 2017 with an exercise price of $2.10 per share, and subject to such other terms and conditions as are set forth in the stock option grant agreement attached hereto as Attachment A. The remainder of the 2018 Base Salary shall be paid in cash.
2.Notwithstanding the foregoing, Executive’s Base Salary for all purposes under the Employment Agreement is $750,000.
3.Except as modified hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with all of the terms and conditions thereof. From and after the date of this Amendment, all references to the term “Agreement” in this Amendment or the original Agreement shall include the terms contained in this Amendment.
4.The Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous discussions, agreements and understandings, whether oral or written, that may have been made or entered into by or between the parties relating to the transactions contemplated hereby.
5.This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument.  Signatures delivered by facsimile shall be effective for all purposes.
[Signatures on the following page]












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has caused this Agreement to be duly executed effective as of the date first written above.


INTERSECTIONS INC.
                	
		
	By:
	/s/ Ronald L. Barden

	      Name:
	Ronald L. Barden

	      Title:
	Chief Financial Officer






EXECUTIVE
                	
	
	/s/ Johannes Jurgens Roets

	Johannes Jurgens Roets
















ATTACHMENT A
Form of Stock Option Agreement
III

Calendar No. 329

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 198

Designating April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National Breast Cancer Survivors’ Day’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 18, 1998

Mr. MACK (for himself, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. LOTT, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr.

HATCH, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. BOND, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. BREAUX,

Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr.

CLELAND, Mr. COCHRAN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr. CRAIG,

Mr. D’AMATO, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. DODD, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. DORGAN,

Mr. DURBIN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mr. FORD, Mr. FRIST, Mr.

GLENN, Mr. GORTON, Mr. GRAMM, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. GREGG, Mr.

HAGEL, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. KOHL, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. INOUYE, Mr.

JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KERREY, Ms. LANDRIEU,

Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. LUGAR, Mr.

MCCONNELL, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr.

MURKOWSKI, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. REED, Mr. ROBB, Mr.

ROCKEFELLER, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SMITH of New

Hampshire, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. WARNER, Mr. WELLSTONE,

Mr. COATS, Mr. HUTCHINSON, and Mr. FEINGOLD) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

MARCH 19, 1998

Reported by Mr. HATCH, without amendment

RESOLUTION

Designating April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National Breast Cancer

Survivors’ Day’’.
2

SRES 198 RS

Whereas breast cancer strikes an estimated 178,700 women

and 1,600 men in the United States annually;

Whereas breast cancer strikes 1 out of every 9 American

women during an average woman’s lifetime;

Whereas breast cancer is the leading cause of death among

American women between the ages of 35 and 54;

Whereas during this decade, it is estimated that more than

1,800,000 women and 12,000 men will be diagnosed with

breast cancer in the United States;

Whereas when breast cancer is detected at an early stage, the

5-year survival rate is 97 percent;

Whereas according to the United States Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, the percentage of American

women who die from breast cancer has begun to decline;

Whereas according to the United States Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, the mortality rate among American women with breast cancer decreased during the period from 1990 to 1995; and

Whereas breast cancer survivors have shown tremendous

courage and determination in the face of adversity: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) designates April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National

3 Breast Cancer Survivors’ Day’’; and

4 (2) requests the President to issue a proclama5 tion calling upon the people of the United States to

6 observe the day with appropriate programs and ac7 tivities.

Calendar No. 329

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 198

RESOLUTION

Designating April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National Breast

Cancer Survivors’ Day’’.

MARCH 19, 1998

Reported without amendment
No. 55010.

#### Makla Bros. and Stern & Stern Textiles, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 162526-K and 163461-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currencies involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currencies of the invoices covered by certain enumerated entries should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
OFFICE OF THE All-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Eonormble, Jerre 

State Trewurer 
~anozu~o Jesse &tnes, p8g8 2 

'8t V8l'hl8 PhO88, inoludiag the 8ktO t'PW8 

(where the ii8081 agenoy fee baa been depodtsa 7 : 

l l the bond holdeP8 eleot to oolleot thmmgh ollb 

or more agenoIe8 other th8a the 8kte Treasury, and 

th8 &i8tl'i.Ot irrrozW% MqUO8tS l F&U&% &tf' the Wt 

deposited with l g u nniteo s wh to bold8 h wer a net 

P-J-41 
lienomblo Joaw J4mea - p8ge 3 
Hamrablo Jea80 Jamor. - plrge 4 
Zamwable Jesse James - page 5 
APPRovBDt OPIHIOH - 

BY (f. w. s&haawn
November 25, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MANZOOR MEMON, Appellant

NO. 14-12-00015-CV V.

HAROON SHAIKH, Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard the parties’ joint motion to dismiss this appeal from 

the judgment signed by the court below on October 3, 2011. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, in part, we order that the court’s former judgment 

of April 30, 2013, be vacated, set aside, and annulled and 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 observance.
No. 62347.

#### Brammer Vee Link Belting, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 242006-K, etc. (New York).

*368Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of iron or steel rivets the same as those the subject of *Brammer Vee Link Belting, Inc.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 1947), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DANNI STEINER,

Petitioner,

v.

DOUG WADDINGTON,

Respondent.

Case No. C06-5143 FDB

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION DISMISSING

HABEAS CORPUS PETITION WITH

PREJUDICE 

The Magistrate Judge recommends this habeas corpus petition be denied and dismissed with

prejudice. The Petitioner challenges a conviction by jury trial for one count of first degree child

molestation ane count second degree child molestation and one count third degree child molestation. 

The Petitioner raises three grounds for review: (1) sufficiency of the evidence, (2) improper “Golden

Rule” argument by prosecutor in closing, and (3) prosecutor’s closing improperly shifted burden of

proof.

As detailed by the Magistrate Judge, the first two issues concerning sufficiency of evidence

and the “Golden Rule” argument are unexhausted and procedurally barred. See, Coleman v.

Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 (1991); Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 276 (1971); Middleton v.

Case 3:06-cv-05143-FDB Document 15 Filed 08/23/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 2

Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1086 (9th Cir.1985). Alternatively, these two issues are without merit. The

third issue regarding shifting the burden of proof is also without merit. The Washington Court of

Appeals conducted the propre review and its ruling is not a decision that was contrary to, or involved

an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court. 

Nor is the state court’s ruling a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the

facts in light of the evidence presented to the state courts.

The Court, having reviewed the petition for writ of habeas corpus, Petitioner’s memorandum

in support of petition, the response, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge J. Kelly

Arnold, objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, does hereby find

and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) Petitioner’s writ of habeas corpus [Dkt. # 1] is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE; and

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Petitioner, counsel for

Respondent and to the Hon. J. Kelly Arnold.

DATED this 23rd day of August, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05143-FDB Document 15 Filed 08/23/06 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO AMEND ANSWER – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

KEVIN T. MCCAGH,

Plaintiff,

v.

HORIZON LINES, LLC, a Delaware limited

liability corporation, 

Defendant.

Case No. CV06-363RSL

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

AMEND ANSWER

This matter comes before the Court on “Defendant Horizon Lines LLC’s Motion to Amend

Answer” (Dkt. # 10). Defendant seeks to amend its complaint to remove defenses in which it disclaimed

responsibility for its employee’s actions. First Amended Answer, aff. def. ¶¶ 26–27. Plaintiff argues that

defendant’s amendment is futile because the Court granted plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint to

include the employee as a defendant.

Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, leave to amend “shall be freely given

when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). The Court follows a “strong policy in favor of allowing

amendment, and considering four factors: bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and the

Case 2:06-cv-00363-RSL Document 21 Filed 06/07/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO AMEND ANSWER – 2

futility of amendment.” Kaplan v. Rose, 49 F.3d 1363, 1370 (9th Cir. 1994). Defendant’s removal of the

sections of its answer which disclaim responsibility for its employee’s actions has a substantial impact on

the character of its defense, and therefore is not futile. There is no reason to prevent defendant from

dropping these affirmative defenses.

For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that “Defendant Horizon Lines LLC’s Motion to

Amend Answer” (Dkt. # 10) is GRANTED.

DATED this 7th day of June, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00363-RSL Document 21 Filed 06/07/06 Page 2 of 2
PUBLIC LAW 111–35—JUNE 30, 2009 123 STAT. 1925 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 837: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 111–28 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009): 

Mar. 10, considered and passed House. 

June 17, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–35 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the Federal building located at 799 United Nations Plaza in New 

York, New York, as the ‘‘Ronald H. Brown United States Mission to the United 

Nations Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

The Federal building located at 799 United Nations Plaza in 

New York, New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ronald 

H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations Building’’. 

SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, 

or other record of the United States to the Federal building referred 

to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ronald 

H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations Building’’. 

Approved June 30, 2009. 

June 30, 2009 

[H.R. 837] 


kgrant on POHRRP4G1 with PUBLAW
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DANNY TABB,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALICE PAYNE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5362 RJB/KLS

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, does hereby find

and ORDER. 

Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security therefor. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below, an initial

partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent

of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the filing fee is

satisfied.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma pauperis,

the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial filing fee

equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the average

monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date of this

Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

Case 3:06-cv-05362-RJB Document 4 Filed 07/18/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee (350.00) for this matter has been paid. 

The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy of

this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgement and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager at the McNeil Island Correctional Center. 

DATED this 18th day of July, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05362-RJB Document 4 Filed 07/18/06 Page 2 of 2