alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 10.18**

 

***FIFTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT***

 

**THIS FIFTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**(“Amendment”)is made and entered into by and between **Cano Petroleum, Inc.**,a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices in Fort Worth, Texas(the “Company”), and **Michael J. Ricketts**,an individual currently residing in Tarrant County, Texas (“Vice President”),effective as of the 31st day of December, 2008 (the “AmendmentEffective Date”).

 

**WHEREAS**, the Company and Vice President entered into thatcertain Employment Agreement dated May 28, 2004, but effective June 1,2004, as amended by the First Amendment to Employment Agreement effective January 1,2006; Second Amendment to Employment Agreement effective June 1, 2006;Third Amendment to Employment Agreement effective June 29, 2007; andFourth Amendment to Employment Agreement effective May 31, 2008 (the “Agreement”);and

 

**WHEREAS**, the Company and Vice President desire to amend,alter, modify, and change the provisions of the Agreement to bring theprovisions into compliance with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Codeof 1986, as amended.

 

**NOW THEREFORE**, for and in consideration of the mutualbenefits to be obtained hereunder and other good and valuation consideration,the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged and confessed, theCompany and Vice President do hereby agree to amend, alter, modify and changethe Agreement, as of the Amendment Effective Date as follows:

 

**1.****                                     ****Section 12of the Agreement is hereby adding the following new sentence at the end of thefirst paragraph of said Section:**

 

Subjectto Section 18 below, all payments made pursuant to this Section 12shall be paid in a single lump sum within ten (10) days following VicePresident’s termination of employment, and any provision of in-kind benefitshereunder shall not affect the in-kind benefits provided in any other taxableyear.

 

Except as specificallyamended hereby, the Agreement remains in full force and effect as originallywritten.

 

**Signatures**

 

Toevidence the binding effect of the covenants and agreements described above,the parties hereto have executed this Amendment effective as of the date firstwritten above.

 
|   | THE  COMPANY:             |
|--------|---------------------------|
|   |                      |
|   | **CANO  PETROLEUM, INC.** |
|   |                      |
|   |                      |
|   | By:                       |       /s/  S. Jeffrey Johnson |
|   |                      | S.  Jeffrey Johnson, Chairman and CEO |
|   |                      |
|   | VICE  PRESIDENT:          |
|   | ** **                |
|   |                      |
|   | By:                       |       /s/  Michael J. Ricketts |
|   |                      | Michael  J. Ricketts |

 

----
No. 52633.

protests 140923-K, etc. (New York).

#### S. Farber & Sons et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of platinum fox fur skins, undressed, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. O. *Brager-Larsen*(36 C. C. P. A. 1, C. A. D. 388). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was therefore 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KIM BERRY,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2580 LKK KJM PS

vs.

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On May 4, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

proper analysis.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02580-LKK -KJM Document 17 Filed 07/22/05 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 4, 2005, are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted; and

3. This action is dismissed.

DATED: July 22, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

berr2580.jo

Case 2:04-cv-02580-LKK -KJM Document 17 Filed 07/22/05 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

             CORPORATE PROPERTY ASSOCIATES 16 - GLOBAL INCORPORATED

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June
30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, John J. Park, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
            of the Company.

/s/  John J. Park
     ---------------------------

     John J. Park
     Chief Financial Officer
      8/6/2004
     ----------------------------
     Date

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 Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated and will be retained by Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Fred Leon Jackson, Jr.,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-2516 GEB PAN P

vs. Notice

D. Spalding, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, seeking leave to

commence an action against prison officials for civil rights

violations in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(1), plaintiff must pay the $150 filing fee required by

28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)(2000). No initial partial filing fee has

been assessed. However, plaintiff must make monthly payments of 

Case 2:04-cv-02516-GEB-EFB Document 10 Filed 07/15/05 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

2

20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his trust

fund account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody

of plaintiff is required to forward payments from plaintiff’s

account to the clerk of the court each time the amount in the

account exceeds $10 until the filing fee is paid. 

The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this notice and

a copy of plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application upon the

Director of the California Department of Corrections and deliver

a copy of this notice to the clerk’s financial division.

Dated: July 14, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02516-GEB-EFB Document 10 Filed 07/15/05 Page 2 of 2
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4826 

To provide that persons having seriously delinquent tax debts shall be 

ineligible for employment by the Internal Revenue Service. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 29, 2024 

Ms. ERNST (for herself and Mrs. BLACKBURN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To provide that persons having seriously delinquent tax debts 

shall be ineligible for employment by the Internal Revenue Service. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Audit the IRS Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. INELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS HAVING SERIOUSLY 

6 DELINQUENT TAX DEBTS FOR EMPLOYMENT 

7 BY INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. 

8 (a) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section— 

9 (1) the term ‘‘seriously delinquent tax debt’’ 

10 means an outstanding debt under the Internal RevVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:56 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S4826.IS S4826

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4826 IS

1 enue Code of 1986 for which a notice of lien has 

2 been filed in public records pursuant to section 6323 

3 of such Code, except that such term does not in4 clude— 

5 (A) a debt that is being paid in a timely 

6 manner pursuant to an agreement under sec7 tion 6159 or section 7122 of such Code; and 

8 (B) a debt with respect to which a collec9 tion due process hearing under section 6330 of 

10 such Code, or relief under subsection (a), (b), 

11 or (f) of section 6015 of such Code, is re12 quested or pending; and 

13 (2) the term ‘‘applicable employee’’ means an 

14 officer, employee, or contract employee of the Inter15 nal Revenue Service. 

16 (b) INELIGIBILITY FOR EMPLOYMENT BY IRS.—An 

17 individual who has a seriously delinquent tax debt shall 

18 be ineligible to be appointed, or to continue serving, as 

19 an applicable employee. 

20 (c) VERIFICATION.— 

21 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 6 months 

22 after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually 

23 thereafter, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue 

24 shall verify that each applicable employee is not in 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4826 IS

1 violation of the requirement described in subsection 

2 (b). 

3 (2) APPLICANTS.—In the case of any individual 

4 who is applying for a position with the Internal Rev5 enue Service as an applicable employee, the Commis6 sioner of Internal Revenue shall verify that such in7 dividual is not in violation of the requirement de8 scribed in subsection (b) prior to such individual 

9 being appointed as an applicable employee. 

10 (d) REGULATIONS.—The Office of Personnel Man11 agement shall, for purposes of carrying out this section 

12 with respect to the Internal Revenue Service, prescribe 

13 any regulations which the Office considers necessary. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

U.S. BANK, N.A.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2458 DFL KJM PS

vs.

GREG POPPIN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On December 5, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. Objections to

the findings and recommendations have been filed. In addition, defendant Gregory Nicholas

Poppin filed a motion to stay the proceedings.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

proper analysis.

Case 2:04-cv-02458-DFL -KJM Document 87 Filed 02/08/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 5, 2005, are adopted in

full;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment is granted;

3. Defendant Poppin’s motion to stay the proceedings is denied; 

4. The court approves the proposed judgment filed by plaintiff on November 30,

2005; and,

5. Judgment shall enter.

DATED: 2/8/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02458-DFL -KJM Document 87 Filed 02/08/06 Page 2 of 2
CIV. S-04-2278 FCD PAN 1

THOMAS N. STEWART, III - #88128

ATTORNEY AT LAW

369 BLUE OAK LANE, 2nd FLOOR

CLAYTON, CA 94517

TELEPHONE (925) 672-8452

TELEFAX (925) 673-1729

Attorneys for Gerald Cohen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD COHEN, Case No. CIV. S-04-2278 FCD PAN

Plaintiff, STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER

v.

WALTER L. SCHMITT and SANDRA

KOPP,

Defendants.

__________________________________/ 

The parties hereto stipulate as follows:

The parties have reached a full and final settlement of all issues in this action. A

Settlement Agreement between the parties has been fully executed. 

Some parts of the Settlement Agreement are to be performed in the future. The parties

shall comply with their Settlement Agreement, a copy of which is incorporated by reference as

if fully set forth. The parties request the Court to retain jurisdiction for one year(s) from the

Case 2:04-cv-02278-FCD-PAN Document 5 Filed 04/26/05 Page 1 of 2
CIV. S-04-2278 FCD PAN 2

date hereof in order to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement under the authority of

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. Of America, 511 U.S. 375, 381-82 (1994).

Although the parties are hereby dismissing this action with prejudice, they agree that the

Court will retain jurisdiction over this action and the parties hereto in order to be able to

enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action through their

designated counsel that this action be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to FRCP

41(a)(2), and the Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement for

one year(s) after the date hereof.

Date: April 14, 2005 Date: April 19, 2005

__S/Edward C. Koons_____ __S/Thomas N. Stewart, III____

Edward C. Koons, Thomas N. Stewart, III, 

Attorney for Defendants Attorney for Plaintiff

IT IS SO ORDERED:

Date: April 26, 2005 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

U.S. District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02278-FCD-PAN Document 5 Filed 04/26/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit



AMENDMENT TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of February 23, 2016 (the “Effective Date”), by and between Spirit Realty Capital, Inc. (the “Company”) and Phillip D. Joseph, Jr. (the “Employee”).  Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement (as defined below).


RECITALS


		
	A.
	The Company and the Employee have entered into an Employment Agreement dated March 25, 2015, as amended by that certain letter agreement dated October 14, 2015 (the “Employment Agreement”).




		
	B.
	The parties hereto wish to amend certain terms of the Employment Agreement.




AMENDMENT


The parties hereto hereby amend the Employment Agreement as follows.  


1.Section 3.  Effective January 1, 2016, the phrase “$400,000” in Section 3 is hereby deleted and replaced with the phrase “$415,000”.


2.Section 4(a).  The first sentence of Section 4(a) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:


“Beginning with calendar year 2016, during the Employment Term, the Employee shall be eligible to receive an annual discretionary incentive payment under the Company’s annual bonus plan as may be in effect from time to time (the “Annual Bonus”), based on a target bonus opportunity equal to 125% of the Employee’s Base Salary (the “Target Bonus”) and a maximum bonus opportunity of 200% of the Employee’s Base Salary, upon the attainment of one or more pre-established performance goals established by the Board (or a committee thereof) in its sole discretion.”


3.This Amendment shall be and, as of the Effective Date, is hereby incorporated in and forms a part of the Employment Agreement.


4.Except as expressly provided herein, all terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.  


(Signature page follows)















IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.
SPIRIT REALTY CAPITAL, INC.




By:    /s/ Thomas H. Nolan, Jr.             
                    Thomas H. Nolan, Jr.    
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
                        


EMPLOYEE


/s/ Phillip D. Joseph, Jr.        
Phillip D. Joseph, Jr.
3699000
32°30'N

35 000

32°15'N
35570000

3 5 5000

32°N

35 7

66°45'E

66°15'E 66°30'E
2 jeuue ap
Sein tan Aof U7 Re |
\ , <f “a wt a" ' of a 4 Zils
: , 4 s i 7

AE
Fae

f
»

* i --r-
%

+ Joe
* '

i

eee

Pe ga db OME RE Sh

= Pan fo 2
2162 TM~ if f , * Y Ne >
ser” 7 | se . a 4 ae,
>: = o uf ° : Lae 7.) ¢
ae i Pe =| warns vf, ; 1 le / |
the a L “ vi J | 2... > ;
AME be f Kuh 9 Ska Ry Me |
wh Pon | in pee |g
f q » ye
it

Va cha sialon a
Oe pees

Ke

Lith! Bj
ag
Re

Pa oo 238908 ie

ral Cr,
Le oc
yd ( \
d
f
\ \

\

-
e
-— ——— i oo
. 5
.

? t cy

ES Be
ms

-=

—_
.
—
+

i lie

. =

=|

‘

EXPLANATION 0 10 KILOMETERS
— Road & Peak |—_____
—-— Stream, mostly intermittant [__] Image quadrant or tile 0 ° MILES
O City, town, or village |__| Image subarea

—- Province boundary
MVDT O W d C G d Di t 

Wes Patterson, DOE Negotiating Committee, 14 Dec 2011

MVDT

Open 

Woun

d

Core 

Gra

de Di

s

t

Impact by setting standard at different 

l l eve

s

© ABBMonth DD, YYYY | Slide 1
MVA Shipped by dEL

MVDT

– all BILs all BILs

– Open Wound only Open Wound only

1 0None includes all 100% of OW MVA shipped 93% of OW MVA shipped 27% of OW MVA shipped 

products shipped –

7% of the MVA is 7% of the MVA is

out-of-scope –mainly KVA>2500 export and step-ups

2 dEL6 should be 

discarded as less 

than 1% of the volume reached this efficiency level

3 M4 assumes a 

greater proportion 

th ffi i

9% of OW MVA shipped 6% of OW MVA shipped 4% of OW MVA shipped 

as the efficiency 

improves move to dEL2 and above

4 One would expect 

the H0/H1 to have 

grown but this is grown but this is

due to the relative pricing of M4 vs H0/H1

5

...

6

...

7

...

8

...

© ABBMonth DD, YYYY | Slide 2
No. 66860.

#### Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/13886, 60/19827, and 61/2679 (Seattle).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, described on the invoices as “black P.V.C. plastic tape,” consists of a material approximately three-fourths of an inch in width, in chief value of polyvinyl chloride, is not a manufacture of synthetic textile, and is similar in use to cotton friction tape, 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES WHITTENBERG,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2313 FCD JFM P

vs.

LT. L. ROLL,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested a second extension of time to file and serve an opposition

to defendant’s June 26, 2006 motion for summary judgment pursuant to the court's order of July

26, 2006. Plaintiff contends he has had insufficient access to the law library and needs an

additional thirty days in which to file an opposition. 

Plaintiff is advised that the material needed to oppose the motion for summary

judgment is primarily evidentiary material not likely to be found in the law library. 

Plaintiff’s request for extension of time will be granted. However, plaintiff is

cautioned that no further extensions of time will be granted. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's August 22, 2006 request for an extension of time is granted; and

Case 2:04-cv-02313-FCD-JFM Document 75 Filed 09/06/06 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

2

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file and

serve an opposition to defendant’s June 26, 2006 motion for summary judgment. Defendant’s

reply, if any, shall be filed seven days thereafter.

DATED: September 6, 2006.

/mp;001

whit2313.36(3)

Case 2:04-cv-02313-FCD-JFM Document 75 Filed 09/06/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 52316.

protest 56426-K (San Francisco).

#### Copeland & Thompson, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.