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

EXHIBIT 10.2(e)


THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE 
EOG RESOURCES, INC. 409A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN  




THIS AGREEMENT by EOG Resources, Inc. (the “Sponsor”),


W I T N E S S E T H:


WHEREAS, the Sponsor maintains the EOG Resources, Inc. 409A Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”);


WHEREAS, the Sponsor retained the right in Section 12 of the Plan to amend the Plan at any time; and


WHEREAS, the Sponsor desires to amend the Plan;


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


1.    Effective as of the date set forth below, the second sentence of Section 9.7 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


“Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of payments: (i) of Grandfathered Amounts (as defined below), the deduction for which would be limited or eliminated by the application of Section 162(m) of the Code; (ii) that would violate securities or other applicable laws; or (iii) that would jeopardize the ability of the Employer to continue as a going concern in accordance with Code Section 409A and the regulations thereunder, deferral of such payments may be made by the Employer at the Employer’s discretion.”


2.    Effective as of the date set forth below, the third sentence of Section 9.7 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


“In the case of a payment described in (i) above, if the Employer, in its sole discretion, elects to defer such payment as provided in the prior sentence, then such payment must be deferred either to a date in the first year in which the Employer or Administrator reasonably anticipates that a payment of such amount would not result in a limitation of a deduction with respect to the payment of such amount under Section 162(m), or the year in which the Participant’s Termination Date occurs.”


3.    Effective as of the date set forth below, a new fourth sentence is hereby added to Section 9.7 of the Plan to read as follows:


“For purposes of this Section 9.7, ‘Grandfathered Amounts’ means amounts that qualify for the transition relief set forth in Section 13601(e)(2) of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.”


1










IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Sponsor has executed this Agreement this 17th day of December, 2020.
EOG RESOURCES, INC.






By /s/ Patricia L. Edwards
Patricia L. Edwards, Senior Vice President and 
Chief Human Resources Officer
2
B REYER
, J., concurring 1 Cite as: 581 U. S. ____ (2017)

Statement of B REYER
, J.



## SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

JOE CLARENCE SMITH v. CHARLES L. RYAN, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL

.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED

STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No. 16–8071. Decided April 24, 2017

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Statement of J USTICE B REYER respecting the denial of
certiorari.
The petitioner, Joe Clarence Smith, was sentenced to death nearly 40 years ago. Primarily because of constitu

tional defects in his sentencing, his execution has been long delayed. He has spent the last 40 years in prison
under threat of execution. And for most of that time Smith has been held in solitary confinement. Pet. for
Cert. 9. Members of this Court have recognized that “[y]ears on end of near-total isolation exact a terrible price.” Davis v. Ayala , 576 U. S. ___, ___ (2015) (K ENNEDY , J., concurring) (slip op., at 4). Long ago we observed that solitary con

finement was “considered as an additional punishment of such a severe kind that it is spoken of . . . as ‘a further terror and peculiar mark of infamy.’ ” In re Medley , 134
U. S. 160, 170 (1890). And, as I have previously pointed out, we have written that the uncertainty a person experi

ences during just four weeks of confinement under threat of execution is “one of the most horrible feelings to which [a person] can be subjected.” Id. , at 172.

What legitimate purpose does it serve to hold any hu

man being in solitary confinement for 40 years awaiting execution? What does this case tell us about a capital punishment system that, in my view, works in random,2 SMITH v. RYAN

Statement of B REYER
, J.

virtually arbitrary ways? I ha ve previously explored these matters more systematically, coming to the conclusion that this Court should hear argument as to whether capi

tal punishment as currently pr acticed is consistent with the Constitution’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual pun

ishment.” Amdt. 8. See Glossip v. Gross , 576 U. S. ___, ___ (2015) (B REYER , J., dissenting). The facts and circum

stances of Smith’s case reinforce that conclusion. I recognize the procedural obstacles that make it diffi

cult for this Court now to grant certiorari in this particu

lar case. See 28 U. S. C. §2254. Those problems would not have prevented the Court from granting certiorari 10 years ago when Smith asked us to do so (after spending 30 years on death row). See Smith v. Arizona , 552 U. S. 985 (2007) (B REYER , J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). Regardless, Smith’s confinement reinforces the need for this Court, or other courts, to consider in an appropriate case the underlying constitutional question.
Before the First Division,

January 20, 1949

No. 52831.

#### Arthur P. Lund et al. *v.*United States,

protests 121801-K, etc. (Boston, etc.).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

ZUCKER : 02-3875

IVY, et al. : 02-3905

HENRY, et al. : 02-3945

BUSH : 02-4140

SIMMONS, et al. : 02-4164

PARTIE, et al. : 02-4247

TKACS : 02-4294

: :

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota..

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

Case 2:02-cv-04140-LP Document 4 Filed 07/25/2002 Page 1 of 2
FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

Louis H. Pollak, Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04140-LP Document 4 Filed 07/25/2002 Page 2 of 2
No. 67737.

#### Brauner & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 60/11070, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 66225, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 748 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 748

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     February 27, 2018.
    Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 1865) to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that section 
230 of such Act does not prohibit the enforcement against providers and users of 
interactive computer services of Federal and State criminal and civil law 
relating to sexual exploitation of children or sex trafficking, and for other 
purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be 
confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the 
Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under 
the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for 
the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature 
of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the 
bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
as read. All points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute are waived. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of 
a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the 
Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be 
offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to 
a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the 
Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion 
of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member 
may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the 
Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except 
one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
vir-ex1039_491.htm



Exhibit 10.39

 

CERTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED BY [***], HAS BEEN OMITTED BECAUSE IT IS BOTH (I) NOT MATERIAL AND (II) WOULD BE COMPETITIVELY HARMFUL IF PUBLICLY DISCLOSED.

 


	
AMENDMENT INFORMATION

	
Agreement to be Amended:
	
Grant agreement between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Vir Biotechnology, Inc. effective January 26, 2018, as amended, and bearing Investment ID INV-010344 (formerly OPP1187970)

	
Amendment Purpose:
	
Update Reporting & Payment Schedule

	
Amendment Date:
	
Date of this email




 

 

THIS AMENDMENT amends, and is made part of, the above-referenced Agreement and is effective as of the date of this email. Capitalized terms not defined in this Amendment will have the meaning provided in the Agreement. Except as modified by this Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the Agreement and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment will prevail.

 

UPDATED REPORTING & PAYMENT SCHEDULE

This Amendment notifies You that the reporting and/or payment schedule for Your grant has changed. Your updated Reporting & Payment Schedule is deleted and replaced with the following: 

 


	
REPORTING & PAYMENT SCHEDULE

	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
 
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
 
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
 
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
 
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
 
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]

	
[***]
	
[***]
	
[***]
	
 
	
 

	
Amended Total Grant Amount
	
Up to $20,776,349.00
December 11, 2017

DNP Quick Reference Card

R E L E A S E 5 . 2

 Adjudicate Multiple Payments at One Time

 Save and Print Results Summary from 

Online Search

 Save and Print Details from Online Search

 Production Fix

Overview of Release

Release Enhancements

Adjudicate Multiple Payments at One Time

Description: Users can now adjudicate 25 payments in 

Payment Integration at once. 

How To Utilize: 

1. From the Filter Payments Matched screen, click 

[Go to Adjudicate Multiple Page].

2. Use the drop-down arrow to assign the Adjudication 

Status that will apply to all selected matches. 

3. Click [Load More] to increase the list by 100 matches.

4. Select matches you wish to adjudicate. Insert any 

comments in the Comments column and click 

[Continue].

NOTE: A warning message appears if you attempt to 

select more than 25 matches. Click [OK] to exit the 

message.

5. The next screen functions as a confirmation page with 

a warning that any adjudicated matches can no longer 

be changed back to Not Adjudicated. Click [Cancel] to 

return to selection screen.

6. Otherwise, click [Adjudicate]. You will be returned to 

the Filter Payments Matched screen with the option to 

adjudicate more matches.
December 11, 2017

Release Enhancements (cont’d)

Save and Print from Online Search

Description: Users can now save and print both summary 

and detail results to provide documentation of searches and 

to investigate matches outside of the Portal. 

How To Utilize Save and Print Results Summary: 

1. Select the Online Search icon from the navigation 

pane.

2. After conducting a search, click [Save/Print Results 

Summary] to create a PDF of the Summary, which can 

be saved and printed.

How To Utilize Save and Print Details: 

1. From the summary page, select the desired data 

sources and click [View Results].

 

2. Click [Save/Print Results Summary + Selected 

Details]. The summary page will automatically be 

included in the PDF, with the detail results on the

following pages. You can print or save the Details.

NOTE: If you select a data source that has more than 25 

matches, you will receive a warning indicating that printing 

the Details may delay the output.

Production Fix

Online Search Discrepancy in Match Results

Issue: When an Online Search was conducted and [View 

Results] was clicked, the match results would display below 

for the selected data source. However, if new search 

criteria were entered and [View Results] was clicked, the 

data source results would continue to be displayed for the 

first search, but the match results would display for the 

second search.

Resolution: Now all results match. To begin a new search, 

enter the search criteria and click [Search]. Or, first click 

[Clear] and enter the search criteria and click [Search].
No. 59933.

#### Wedemann & Godknecht, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 232937-K and 235969-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of table knives the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 59316, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

The undersigned,Christopher A. Menard, Chief Financial Officer of Phase Forward Incorporated(the “Company”), in connection with the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”), as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, hereby certifiespursuant to the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

 

·                       the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

 

·                       the information in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

This certification isbeing provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of theReport, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.

 
|   | By:    | /s/ CHRISTOPHER A.  MENARD                                                                         |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Christopher A. Menard

Chief Financial Officer

Phase Forward  Incorporated

November 6, 2009 |

 

1

----
# Official Journal C 378/2011

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2011.378.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 378 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5423 December 2011 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2011.378.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 378

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5423 December 2011

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2011/C 378/01 | Council conclusions on combating match-fixing | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2011/C 378/01

Council conclusions on combating match-fixing

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### STERN v. STERN.

No. 51581.

Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

March 2, 1936.

*267John J. O’Brien, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

M. M. Doyle, of Washington, D. C., for defendant.

ADKINS, Associate Justice.

On June 25, 1932 a final decree was signed in this cause granting plaintiff a limited divorce from defendant.

On January 7, 1936 plaintiff filed in this cause a petition for the enlargement of that decree into a decree for absolute divorce under the Act of August 7, 1935, Public No. 252 D.C.Code 1940, § 16 — 403. This statute provides that under certain circumstances a final decree of divorce from bed and board may be enlarged into a decree of absolute divorce.

Plaintiff prayed both for a writ of subpoena to be served on defendant and for a rule to show cause. Only a rule was issued. It was signed January 7, 1936 returnable February 3, and was served January 11, less than twenty days (exclusive of Sundays) from the return day.

Defendant appeared specially and pleaded to the jurisdiction. He contends that the proceeding must be by separate suit and that he can be brought in only by summons under section 1536 of the Code of 1901, D.C.Code 1940, § 13 — 101.

1. In my judgment the proceeding may be either by a new suit or by a petition, in the old suit.

2. In many of these cases the defendant has been brought in by rule to show cause; his appearance in response thereto is sufficient to give the court jurisdiction. But where, as here, defendant refuses to appear I think the petitioner must proceed by summons under section 1536 of the Code.

Therefore the prayer of defendant’s plea that the rule to show cause be discharged will be granted, but his prayer that the petition be dismissed is denied.
----

| (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. |

|   | /s/      Geoffrey Russell                          |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Interim      Chief Executive Officer and President |
|   |                                               |
|   | Date:      April 4, 2008                           |

----
No. 59423.

protests 214979-K, etc. (New York).

#### Herzman Scarfs, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. D. 585), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 62432.

#### Vandegrift Forwarding Co., *Inc.,*and Liberty Import Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 58/3117 and 58/4487 (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of soup mixes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Cresca Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 211, C. D. 1864), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
H. Res. 59 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 24, 2017. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE: Ms. 

Shea-Porter and Mr. Espaillat. 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS: Mr. Lawson of 

Florida. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
March 22, 1955

No. 58879.

protest 233635-K.

#### W. R. Grace & Co. *v.*United States,

Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
CENTRALIZED RECEIVABLES SERVICE 

(CRS) 

TECHNICAL BULLETIN

Number 21-01

January 4, 2021

HAPPY NEW YEAR! Please see below for important CRS reminders:

Interest Rate Change

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has updated the Current Value of Funds (CVF) Rate for the 

2021 calendar year (CY) (https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/cvfr/rates.html).

New cases referred to CRS in CY21 will accrue interest at the CVF rate of 1% for all programs 

that have elected to use the default rate on their CRS Agency Profile.

For questions, contact CRS Agency Relations via email (crsagencyrelationshared@usbank.com) 

or by telephone using your Agency Program Phone Number, Option 5.

CRS Single-Sign On

In support of the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the 

Fiscal Service, has implemented Multi-Factor Authentication for signing onto CRS. 

Important Single Sign On (SSO) deadlines:

• January 15, 2021 – CRS system user supervisors/managers must respond to the CRS 

User Audit to avoid loss of CRS user access.

• March 31, 2021 – CRS User ID/password/tokens are disabled. 

• April 1, 2021 – All users are required to use their PIV or CAC to log into the CRS web 

portal. 

If you do not have a PIV or CAC identification, or for questions regarding the CRS SSO 

requirement or the CRS User Audit, contact CRS Support (crs.support@usbank.com).

<end>
p. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1828 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 58 ) ll-K - (B ) -4 6 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 11/12/200811:12:50AM Sheet 58of 325P. 2 %\ _, (0)
II-K-(B)-4 6
REVIEW O F PARTICULAT E CONTRO L COST S - EE A LETTE RDATE D JUL Y1 , 1980 . Lette r fro

m N.D . Noe , PEDCo , Inc . t o J . Pratapas , EPArSASD . Jul y 25 , 1980 . THI S INFORMATION

CA N B E FOUND I

N DOCKE T A-79-02 , ITE

M II-K-(B)-4 6