alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COh'lMISSION 

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20580 

Division of Advertising Practices 

Mary Koelbel Engle 

Associate Director 

March 15,2005 

VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL and EMAIL 

Annette Dickinson, Ph.D. 

President 

Council for Responsible Nutrition 

1828 L St. NW, Suite 900 

Washington, DC 20036-5 1 14 

Re: Council for Res~onsible Nutrition's Comulaint Against 

Dear Dr. Dickinson: 

Thank you for your January 12,2005, letter and subsequent materials regarding 

ConsumerLab.com, LLC ("ConsumerLab) and its Product Review and Voluntary Certification 

programs for testing dietary supplements and similar consumer products ("Test Programs"). 

Council for Responsible Nutrition alleges that ConsumerLab's "entire business model represents 

an egregious form of consumer fraud and deception," and asserts, among other things, that 

* "[Clompanies are pressured . . . into paying a fee" for testing under the 

Voluntary Certification program to avoid potential negative consequences 

of having their products tested under the Product Review program; and 

that 

* ConsumerLab's Test Programs and its reporting of test results "are likely 

to mislead consumers into believing that ConsumerLab is operating in the 

public interest and cannot be influenced by any outside party." 

The Commission has been directed by Congress to act in the interest of all consumers to 

prevent deceptive or unfair acts or practices, pursuant to Section 5 of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 3 45. A representation, omission, or practice is deceptive if (1) it is 

likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances; and (2) it is "matesial," 

that is, likely to affect consumers' conduct or decisions with regard to a product or service. An 

act or practice is unfair if it causes or is likely to cause injury to consumers that (1) is substantial; 

(2) is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition; and (3) is not 
Council for Responsible Nutrition 

March 15, 2005 

Page 2 

reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves. 

In determining whether to take enforcement or other action in any particular situation, the 

Commission rnay consider a number of factors, including the type of violation alleged, the nature 

and amount of consumer injury at issue, the number of consumers affected, and the likelihood of 

preventing future unlawful conduct and securing redress or other relief. After reviewing the 

complaint and related materials, staff is not recommending agency action at this time. The 

Commission reserves the right, however, to take such further action as the public interest rnay 

require. 

Thank you for bringing Council for Responsible Nutrition's concerns regarding 

ConsumerLab.com, LLC to our attention. 

Very truly yours, 

cc: Tod Cooperman, M.D. 

President 

ConsumerLab.com, LLC
#### James HIGDON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-843.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 16, 1971.

D. Turner Matthews, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and P. A. Pacyna, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant takes this appeal to review the order of revocation of probation entered by the court below. We have reviewed the record and find that there was sufficient evidence to support the order of revocation.

Affirmed.

PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
#### TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., Appellant, v. John Dixon DAVIS, Appellees.

No. 72-1052.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 27, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Isiah Richard EMANUEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-927.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 14, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES CONTAINED IN FORM 10-KSB AS
FILED HEREWITH, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,032,001
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,016,630
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,185,090
<PP&E>                                      12,109,453
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,871,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,704,156
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,848,582
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           49,100
<PREFERRED>                                    200,000
<COMMON>                                     8,676,273
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,969,799)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,704,156
<SALES>                                      8,678,041
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,066,126
<CGS>                                        3,039,604
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,034,467
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             149,725
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,611,934
<INCOME-TAX>                                   101,551
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,510,383
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,510,383
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .37
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.1

                                 Promissory Note

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE                       US$ 1,000
                                 ---------------


For value received,  Medina Coffee,  Inc.  ("Medina"),  promises to pay to Harry
Miller ("Mr.  Miller"),  the sum of US$ 1,000 Dollars (the "Debt").  The Debt is
without interest.

Medina agrees to repay the Debt on demand.  Mr. Miller is under no obligation to
renegotiate the terms of repayment or to defer payments.

Medina  agrees that if it fails to repay the Debt as  required  under this Note,
Mr. Miller may,  without  notice,  proceed to exercise any and all of the rights
and remedies  under this Note or at law or in equity,  on the  occurrence of any
such  default or at any other time.  Mr.  Miller may exercise any and all rights
which will be cumulative and not mutually exclusive.

Medina  understands  that failure to repay the Debt in accordance with this Note
will be considered a default.  If Note is placed in the hands of an attorney for
collection  after  default,  Medina  agrees to pay  reasonable  attorneys'  fees
actually incurred, plus costs.

The entire Debt is  immediately  due and payable in the event of the  following:
insolvency of Medina; if bankruptcy  proceedings are instituted  against Medina;
dissolution of Medina; or in the event there is any deterioration,  depreciation
or impairment in the value of the assets of Medina.

This Note is to be  governed by and  construed  in  accordance  with the laws of
Washington State.


Date:    October 5 , 1999
                ---

                               MEDINA COFFEE, INC.

                                /s/ Harry Miller
                               ----------------------------------
                           By: Harry Miller, Sole Officer & Director
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 8201]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4467]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment Standards Administration

20 CFR Parts 718, 722, 725, 726 and 727

RIN 1215-AA99


Regulations Implementing the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety 
Act of 1969, as Amended; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Employment Standards Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This document extends the period for filing comments regarding 
the proposed rule to amend and revise the regulations implementing the 
Black Lung Benefits Act. This action is taken to permit additional 
comment from interested persons.

DATE: Comments must be received on or before May 23, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments on the proposed rule to James L. 
DeMarce, Director, Division of Coal Mine Workers' Compensation, Room C-
3520, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, 
DC 20210.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James L. DeMarce, (202) 219-6692.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of the January 22, 
1997 (62 FR 3338-3435), the Department of Labor published a proposed 
rule intended to amend and revise the regulations implementing the 
Black Lung Benefits Act, subchapter IV of the Federal Coal Mine Health 
and Safety Act of 1969, as amended. Interested persons were requested 
to submit comments on or before March 24, 1997.
    The Department has received requests for an extension of the 
comment period from groups representing coal mine operators, coal mine 
construction companies, the insurance industry, organized labor, and 
black lung claimants. Because of the interest in this proposal, the 
Department believes that it is desirable to extend the comment period 
for all interested persons. Therefore, the comment period for the 
proposed rule, amending and revising 20 CFR parts 718, 722, 725, 726 
and 727, is extended through May 23, 1997.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18 day of February, 1997.
Bernard E. Anderson,
Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-4467 Filed 2-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-27-M
**Exhibit 10.38**

**Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation, as Amended**

Cash Compensation: 

Annual Retainer for Non-Employee Directors (other than Chairman): $20,000 

Annual Retainer for Non-Employee Chairman of the Board (to be paid to Lead Independent Director in the event of an employee or non-independent Chairman): $30,000 

Annual compensation for service as Chairman of the Audit Committee: $12,500 

Compensation per Board (or any Special MeetingAttended In Person: $1,000 

Compensation per Board Meeting Attended by Telephone: $500 

Reimbursement of reasonable travel and lodging expenses incurred in connection with attendance at Board meetings. 

Equity Compensation (as provided in 2004 Director Stock Option Plan, as amended): 

Initial Grant to Non-Employee Director: 10,000 shares ofCommon Stock 

Annual Grant to Non-Employee Directors: 3,000 shares of Common Stock
#### Roger JORDAN, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 71-223.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 7, 1971.

Habeas corpus denied.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00612-CR

Lupe Ortiz

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

82nd District Court of Falls County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 10604

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 4, 2024
269 La. 679

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Victor BEAN v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 51593.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 17, 1971.

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a writ of certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Field V. Gremillion, Judge of the Ninth Judicial District, Court for the Parish of Rapides, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 11th day of October, 1971, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on the date aforesaid, at 11 o’clock A.M., why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
#### GANG NAIL TRUSS COMPANY OF SHREVEPORT, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. D. & R. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Inc., and Joe D. Lane, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11571.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

March 2, 1971.

James E. Bookter, Bossier City, for defendant-appellant, D. & R. Construction Co.; Love, Rigby, Dehan & Love, by Kenneth Rigby, Shreveport, for plaintiff-ap-pellee.

Booth, Lockard, Jack, Pleasant & LeSage, by John R. Pleasant, Shreveport, for defendant-appellee, Joe D. Lane; Peters, Ward, Johnson & Phillips, by Hugh T. Ward, Shreveport, for intervenor-appellee, American Title Insurance Co.

Before AYRES, PRICE and HEARD, JJ.

PRICE, Judge.

The facts giving rise to the issues on this appeal are identical to those recited in Bossier Millwork & Supply Company v. D. & R. Construction Company, Inc., La.App., 245 So.2d 414.

The cases were tried jointly in the district court on issues that were common to both, and this appeal also involves the sole question of the correctness of the trial court judgment holding John R. Duncan personally liable for the- debt of the corporate entity, D. & R. Construction Company, which was resolved adversely to appellant in the decision rendered by this court in the above cited case.

Gang Nail Truss Company of Shreveport, Inc. filed this action to recover the *418sum of $528.78 for materials furnished to D. & R. Construction Company, Inc., and the sum of $59.37 owing to Shreveport Sash & Door Company, Inc., which account had been assigned to this plaintiff. Recognition and enforcement of liens filed on Lot 49 of Greenacres Subdivision, Unit 7, of Bossier City, was requested.

As in the companion case referred to, American Title Insurance Company filed an intervention and third party action against D. & R. Construction Company, Inc., its in-corporators, John R. Duncan and Kenneth Neal Roberts, asking that they be held liable in solido for any amount American Title Insurance Company is required to pay under its insurance contract protecting the property insured from inchoate liens.

Judgment was rendered on the main demand as prayed for by plaintiff and on the third party demand against D. & R. Construction Company, Duncan and Roberts, for the same amount.

Duncan is the sole appellant from this judgment. The specification of error and issues being identical to those in the Bossier Millwork & Supply Company v. D. & R. Construction Company, et al., case, supra, for the reasons set forth in our opinion in that case, the judgment appealed from in this cause is affirmed at appellant’s cost.
GST-2013.12.31-Exhibit 10.27


Exhibit 10.27




SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED GASTAR EXPLORATION LTD. EMPLOYEE 
CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE PLAN


The GASTAR EXPLORATION LTD. EMPLOYEE CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE PLAN (as previously amended and restated) (the “Plan”) is hereby amended effective as of March 1, 2014 pursuant to the authorization and direction of the Board of Directors of GASTAR EXPLORATION INC.,  as successor to Gastar Exploration, Ltd.
1.The Plan is hereby renamed the Gastar Exploration Inc. Employee Change of Control Severance Plan. 


2.All references in the Plan to the “Company” shall hereinafter be references to Gastar Exploration Inc. which, for the avoidance of doubt, shall be a participating employer in the Plan pursuant to Section 4.4.  


3.The reference to “Schedule A” in the definition of “Annual Target Bonus” in the Plan is hereby replaced with “Appendix A”.


4.Appendix A of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:




APPENDIX A
	
			
	Position of Covered Employee
	Severance Period (in years)
	Bonus Target

	CEO
	3.00
	89%

	CFO
	2.50
	88%

	COO
	2.50
	88%

	VP
	2.00
	65%

	Director
	1.50
	30%

	Manager
	1.25
	0%

	Supervisor
	1.00
	0%

	Staff
	0.75
	0%






5.Except as expressly modified by this Second Amendment, the terms of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect and are hereby confirmed and ratified.  































EXECUTED March 12, 2014, effective for all purposes as of March 1, 2014.


                            
GASTAR EXPLORATION INC.
                                                                                                                              	
		
	By:
	/s/ J. Russell Porter

	Name:
	J. Russell Porter

	Title:
	President and Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 10.31**

** **

***GOOD FAITH AMENDMENT TO COMPLY WITH CODE SECTION 401(a)(31)(B) AS***

***AMENDED BY THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TAX RELIEF RECONCILIATION ACT OF***

***2001 (EGTRRA)***

 

This amendment of thePlan is adopted to reflect certain provisions of the Economic Growth and TaxRelief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA). This amendment is intended as good faith compliance with therequirements of EGTRRA and is to be construed in accordance with EGTRRA andguidance issued thereunder.  Thisamendment shall be effective as of March 28, 2005.  This amendment shall continue to apply to thePlan, including the Plan as later amended, until such provisions are integratedinto the Plan or the good faith compliance EGTRRA amendment provisions are specificallyamended.

 

This amendment shallsupersede any previous good faith compliance EGTRRA amendment and theprovisions of the Plan to the extent those provisions are inconsistent with theprovisions of this amendment.

 

Plan Name:  FARMER BROS. CO. AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYEESTOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN

 

The Plan named abovegives the Employer the right to amend it at any time.  According to that right, the Plan is amendedas follows:

 

The provisions of thePlan in Section 7.06 that provide for the involuntary distribution ofvested accrued benefits of $5,000 or less, are modified to reduce the $5,000threshold to $1,000.  The $5,000threshold in such provisions is reduced to $1,000 and the value of theParticipant’s interest in the Plan for such purpose shall include any rollovercontributions (and earnings thereon) within the meaning of Code Sections402(c), 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), 408(d)(3)(A)(ii), and 457(e)(16).  Any such involuntary distribution of vestedaccrued benefits shall be made in cash.

 

This amendment is made anintegral part of the aforesaid Plan and is controlling over the terms of saidPlan with respect to the particular items addressed expressly herein.  All other provisions of the Plan remainunchanged and controlling.

 

Signing this amendment,the Employer, as plan sponsor, has made the decision to adopt this planamendment.  The Employer is acting inreliance on its own discretion and on the legal and tax advice of its ownadvisors, and not that of any member of the Principal Financial Group or anyrepresentative of a member company of the Principal Financial Group.

 

 

Signed this 15th day of December, 2008

 
|   | FARMER BROS. CO.    |
|--------|---------------------|
|   |                |   |
|   | /S/ JOHN E. SIMMONS |
|   |                |
|   | By                  | John E. Simmons |
|   |                | (Print  Name) |
|   |                |   |
|   |                |   |
|   |                | Title |

 

1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q FOR
THE THREE  MONTHS  ENDED  MARCH 31,  1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                                76,523
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                    0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                      0
<EQUITIES>                                               4
<MORTGAGE>                                               0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                            0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                     109,952
<CASH>                                               1,758
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                  13,164
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                              49,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     301,081
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                     59,716
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                     28
<POLICY-OTHER>                                      45,128
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                5,017
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                     46,108
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,169
<OTHER-SE>                                         115,547
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       301,081
<PREMIUMS>                                           8,581
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                                  1,753
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                       0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                         405
<BENEFITS>                                           3,741
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          1,203
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                                 2,916
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      1,503
<INCOME-TAX>                                           339
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  2,268
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         2,268
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.44
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                           0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                      0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                        0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                       0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                         0  
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                          0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
#### Ellen GORDON, et al., Appellants, v. Arthur B. KLEVEN, Appellee.

No. 69-33.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 30, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.