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

Exhibit 10.3

AMENDMENT TO THE
AVIS BUDGET GROUP, INC.
AMENDED AND RESTATED EQUITY AND INCENTIVE PLAN
October 26, 2021
This Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Avis Budget Group, Inc. Amended and Restated Equity and Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), dated as of October 26, 2021, has been approved by the board of directors Avis Budget Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).  
AMENDMENT
Section 1.      Defined Terms. Unless otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings given them in the Plan.
Section 2.      Authority to Amend the Plan. Pursuant to Section 8(d)(ii) of the Plan, the Board may at any time amend the Plan, in whole or in part, provided that such amendment does not adversely affect the rights of any Grantee (as defined in the Plan) without such Grantee’s consent. The Board has determined that this Amendment does not adversely affect any Grantee’s rights under the Plan, and as such, Grantee approval is not required to effectuate this Amendment.    
Section 3.    Amendment to the Plan. The final sentence of Section 3 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting such sentence in its entirety and replacing such sentence with the following:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing, neither the Board, the Committee nor their respective delegates shall have the authority to reprice, or cancel in exchange for a new Award or cash payment, any Option or Stock Appreciation Right with an exercise price or grant price, as applicable, above the then-current Fair Market Value of one share of Stock without first obtaining the approval of the Company’s stockholders. ”
Section 4.    Effect on the Amendment. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. Any reference to the Plan contained in any notice, request or other document executed concurrently with or after the execution and delivery of this Amendment shall be deemed to include this Amendment unless the context shall otherwise require.  
Section 5.      Governing Law. This Amendment shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to the conflict of law principles thereof.
Section 6.      Headings. Section headings in this Amendment are included herein for convenience of reference only and shall not constitute a part of this Amendment for any other purposes.


*  *  *    *  *
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,688
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           9,838
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     18,880
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        255,470
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,824
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 297,996
<DEPOSITS>                                     182,014
<SHORT-TERM>                                    42,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,199
<LONG-TERM>                                     42,051
<COMMON>                                        20,018
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,014
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 297,996
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 19,817
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,347
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   109
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,273
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               7,795
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,374
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,900
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      155
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 128
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  6,594
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,471
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,471
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,198
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.35
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                        254
<LOANS-PAST>                                         4
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    598
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,689
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       33
<RECOVERIES>                                        13
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,824
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            420


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Bureau of Consumer Protection

April 8, 2002

Robert E. Hirshon, President

Robert D. Evans, Director, Governmental A ffairs
American Bar Association

740 Fifteenth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005-1022

Dear Mr. Hirshon and Mr. Evans:

Iam writing in response to your correspondence regarding the application of Title Ve
Subtitle A, of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6801 et seq. (“GLB Act”) and the
Federal Trade Commission’s Rule, Privacy of Consumer Financial Information, 16 CFR § 313
(“the Privacy Rule”), to attorneys at law.

Your letters question the appropriateness and utility of applying the GLB Act’s privacy
provisions to attorneys engaged in the practice of law. Specifically, you request that the
Commission exempt attorneys at law from the application of the Privacy Rule.

We have carefilly considered your concerns, and recognize the issues you have raised
regarding the application of the GLB Act to attorneys at law. However, there are significant
questions as to the legal authority of the Commission to grant the exemption you request.

As you know, the GLB Act itself states that entities engaged in “financial activities” are
subject to the Act. Although the Commission has express authority under the GLB Act to grant
exceptions, that authority is limited to providing exceptions to the requirements of Section 502.
The Act does not provide the Commission with express authority to grant exemptions from the
other provisions of the GLB Act, including the initial and annual notice provisions. See GLB
Act § 504 (b), 15 U.S.C. 6804 (b).

Sincerely,

Ai . Howard Beales
Director
#### ORANGE MEMORIAL HOME, INCORPORATED, a Florida non-profit corporation, Appellant, v. Marie WHITE, a/k/a Mrs. O. L. White, Appellee.

No. 72-444.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 10, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Parker Lee McDonald, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
Order entered July 14, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00158-CR

FERNANDO MUNOZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14-00579-M

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On July 10, 2015, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the 

reporter’s record had not been filed. On July 13, 2015, we received the reporter’s record. 

Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, we VACATE the July 10, 2015 order 

requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order. 

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
#### Damon Shelton NAPIER v. STATE.

1 Div. 747.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

April 18, 1978.

*After Remandment from the Supreme Court of Alabama*

BOWEN, Judge.

The judgment of conviction of the appellant is reversed and the cause remanded on authority of the decision of the Alabama Supreme Court in *Napier*v. *State,*357 So.2d 1011 (1978).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.
WEX 2013.12.31 EX 10.21






Exhibit 10.21


[WEX Inc. requests that the marked portions of the exhibit be granted confidential treatment under Rule 24b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.]


2013 FleetOne Integration Long-Term Incentive Program 


Award Date: 
March 15, 2013


Unit Allocation Ratio: 
100% Performance Based Restricted Stock Units


Vesting Schedule:
50% of the award vests on March 15, 2014 based on achievement of the 2013 performance metrics listed below and 50% of the award vests on March 15, 2015 based on the achievement of the 2014 performance metrics. 


2013 Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Calculations: 
The number of PSUs vesting under this 2013 FleetOne Integration Grant Program is based on the following: 
	
														
	 
	Payout %(1)(5)
	EBITDA (40%) (2)
	PPG Adj Revenue Adj 
(30%)(3)
	SYNERGIES
(30%)(4)

	 
	 
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)

	Threshold
	25%
	85.0%
	$
	23,630
	

	85.0%
	$
	54,700
	

	80.0%
	$
	2,400
	


	Target
	100%
	100.0%
	$
	27,800
	

	100.0%
	$
	64,400
	

	100.0%
	$
	3,000
	


	Max
	200%
	120.0%
	$
	33,460
	

	120.0%
	$
	77,300
	

	200.0%
	$
	6,000
	









2014 Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Calculations: 
	
									
	 
	Payout %(1)(5)
	EBITDA (40%) (2)
	PPG Adj Revenue 
(30%)
	SYNERGIES
(30%)(4)

	 
	 
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)
	Perf Level(3)
	$(,000)

	Threshold
	25%
	85.0%
	$  [**]
	85.0%
	$  [**]
	80.0%
	$  [**]

	Target
	100%
	100.0%
	$  [**]
	100.0%
	$  [**]
	100.0%
	$  [**]

	Max
	200%
	120.0%
	$  [**]
	120.0%
	$  [**]
	200.0%
	$  [**]






		
	(1) 
	Threshold EBITA performance must be achieved for any PSUs to vest. 


		
	(2) 
	Adjusted EBITDA is defined as 2013 Deal Model EBITDA of $27.8M adjusted by synergy savings, synergy costs,and integration costs, totaling ($3.8M) for 2013 


		
	(3) 
	PPG Adjusted Revenue Full-Year is reported 2013 Revenue for the Americas adjusted for the difference between reported 2013PPG and Board-approved budgeted 2013 PPG of $3.50 US. 


		
	(4) 
	Synergy target for 2014 based on Deal Model and represents net synergy savings that are $3.0M incremental to 2013 


		
	(5) 
	 Shares granted are ratable between payout levels. 









ActiveUS 124564237v.1
#### Bailey WILLOUGHBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald DENNISON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-15183.

D.C. No. CV-97-01703-KJD(PAL).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 2002.*

Decided Aug. 19, 2002.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Bailey Willoughby, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants Dennison, Saxon, and Haggerty in Wil-loughby’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Saxon violated his civil rights by arresting him for a suspected parole violation, that Haggerty violated his right to due process when he found probable cause to believe that a parole violation had occurred in a preliminary parole revocation hearing, and Dennison violated Willough-by’s civil rights by issuing a retake warrant. Willoughby also appeals the district court’s order, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m), dismissing the remaining defendants for failure to effect timely service. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s summary judgment, *Frost v. Agnos,*152 F.3d 1124, 1128 (9th Cir.1998), and for abuse of discretion the dismissal without prejudice for failure to timely serve a summons and complaint, *Walker v. Sumner,*14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir.1994), *abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner,*515 U.S. 472, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995).

Because Willoughby’s claims against Saxon, Haggerty, and Dennison arose from his parole revocation proceeding, they were entitled to absolute immunity. *See*Nev.Rev.Stat. § 213.10705; *Anderson v. Boyd,*714 F.2d 906, 909 (9th Cir.1983). The district court, therefore, properly granted summary judgment.

The district court properly dismissed the remaining defendants for failure to effect timely service because Willoughby failed to show good cause why he did not provide the United States Marshal with addresses for those defendants during the two years between the filing of the complaint and dismissal of the unserved defendants. *See Walker,*14 F.3d at 1422 (9th Cir.1994).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                          Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
     O'Charley's Inc.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
33-39869, No. 33-39872, No. 33-51316, No. 33-51338, No. 333-63495, and No.
333-59484 on Form S-8) of O'Charley's Inc. of our report dated February 7, 2002,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of O'Charley's Inc. and subsidiaries
as of December 30, 2001 and December 31, 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of earnings, shareholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 30, 2001,
which report appears in the December 30, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of
O'Charley's Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Nashville, Tennessee
March 28, 2002
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS E ASTLAND , T EXAS J UDGMENT

John R. Holley and Ailza M. Holley

, * From the 35 th District Court of Brown County, Trial Court No. CV1407271

.

Vs. No. 11

- 15

- 00046

- CV * February 10 , 2017

Holley and Taylor, Inc.; Pamela K. Holley, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, J

. individually and as independent e xecutor (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

o f the Estate of Mary Marshall Holley, Willson , J. , and Bailey, J. ) Deceased; and Melinda McDaniel,

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there

is n o error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed. The costs incurred by reason o f this appeal are taxed against John R. Holley and Ailza M. Holley

.
EXHIBIT 32.2






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION


906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






In connection with the Annual Report of Full Throttle Indoor Kart Racing, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lawrence Kopf, Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer, certify, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: November 9, 2011
By: /s/ Lawrence Kopf

Name: Lawrence Kopf

Title: Chief Financial Officer
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TE XAS

N O

. W R

- 9 4
, 0 6 6

- 0 1

I N R E J A C K I L

. P I C K
, R e l a t o r

O N M O T I O N F O R L E A V E T O F I L E P E T I T I O N F O R W R I T O F M A N D A M U S
, M O T I O N T O S E A L P R O C E E D I N G S
, A N D M O T I O N T O S T A Y

C A U S E N O

. 0 5

- 2 2

- 0 0 8 1 7

- C V I N F I F T H C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

C A U S E N O

. O S W

- 2 2

- 0 0 0 3 0

- H I N T H E C R I M I N A L D I S T R I C T C O U R T N O

. 1

D A L L A S C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m

.

O R D E R

W e h a v e b e f

o r e u s a m o t i o n f

o r l e a v e t o f

i l e a p e t i t i o n f

o r a w r i t o f m a n d a m u s , a

m o t i o n t o s e a l t h e p r o c e e d i n g s , a n d a m o t i o n t o s t a y

. A t t h i s t i m e , w e g r a n t t h e m o t i o n t o

s e a l t h e p r o c e e d i n g s , a n d w e s t a y e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s o r d e r p e n d i n g t h e

d i s p o s i t i o n o f R e l a t o r ’ s m o t i o n f o r l e a v e t o f

i l e

.

F i l e d : A u g u s t 2 4

, 2 0 2 2

D o N o t P u b l i s h
#### GREENVILLE LUMBER COMPANY, INC., D. J. Sherman, President v. BANKERS TRUST SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION.

No. 50631.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 20, 1978.

Felts, Russell, Adams & Lueckenbach, Nathan P. Adams, Jr., Greenville, for appellant.

Stuart Robinson, Jackson, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and WALKER and BOWLING, JJ.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County; B. B. Wilkes, Judge.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 7050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3795]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated October 21, 1996, and published in the Federal 
Register on November 29, 1996, (61 FR 60729), Cambridge Isotope Lab, 50 
Frontage Road, Andover, Massachusetts 01810, made application by 
renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered 
as an importer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methaqualone (2565)........................  I.                         
Dimethyltryptamine (7435)..................  I.                         
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II.                        
Methamphetamine (1105).....................  II.                        
Pentobarbital (2270).......................  II.                        
Secobarbital (2315)........................  II.                        
Phencyclidine (7471).......................  II.                        
Cocaine (9041).............................  II.                        
Codeine (9050).............................  II.                        
Benzoylecogonine (9180)....................  II.                        
Methadone (9250)...........................  II.                        
Morphine (9300)............................  II.                        
Fentanyl (9801)............................  II.                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in Title 21, United States Code, Section 823(a) and 
determined that the registration of Cambridge Isotope Lab to import the 
listed controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and 
with United States obligations under international treaties, 
conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971, at this time. 
Therefore, pursuant to Section 1008(a) of the Controlled Substances 
Import and Export Act and in accordance with Title 21, Code of Federal 
Regulations, Section 1311.42, the above firm is granted registration as 
an importer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed above.

    Dated: January 27, 1997.
Gene R. Haislip,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-3795 Filed 2-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cubic Corporation (the “Corporation”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter J. Zable, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(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 Corporation.

 

 
| /s/   W. J. Zable                                  |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| W.   J. Zable                                      |   |
| Chairman,   President, and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                                               |   |
| Date:   February 1, 2011                      |   |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

                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 Daxor Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date thereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph Feldschuh,
M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ Joseph Feldschuh, M.D.
--------------------------
Joseph Feldschuh, M.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 11, 2003


                                       7