alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that have no

precedenti al value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of wellsettled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on

the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 95-30187

Summary Calendar

_______________________

ERICO DAVIAS,

a/k/a Eric Davis,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JOHN C. DURIO and

JOHN P. NAVARRE,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

(93 CV 251)

_________________________________________________________________ August 16, 1995

Before DAVIS, JONES and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appellant Erico Davias, now a New Hampshire state

prisoner, filed this § 1983 complaint for damages against the

former sheriff and a district judge of Allen Parish, Louisiana for

events dealing with his extradition to New Hampshire. Upon remand

of the case from this court, the appellees moved for summary2

judgment, and Davias supplied no admissible controverting proof.

Based on the magistrate judge's recommendation, the district court

granted summary judgment for Sheriff Durio and Judge Navarre.

Davias has appealed but has raised no reversible error. We affirm.

Davias's only argument in his appellate brief is that the

defendants' summary judgment proof was altered on their behalf; and

he apparently attaches some new court records to his brief. These

efforts are wasted. Davias cited no facts supporting his

contention of altered evidence either to the trial court or this

court, and we will not consider vague allegations. The documents

h e has attached appear regular on their face and simply la y the

groundwork for extradition to New Hampshire. We cannot fathom what

he sought to gain by offering them to this court.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for

each of the defendants. Davias alleged claims against Judge

Navarre that related to his official duties, for which he has

absolute immunity from § 1983 liability. S tump v. Sparkman

, 435

U.S. 349, 357-60 (1978). Durios's summary judgment evidence stated

that he had no personal involvement with Davias or his extradition

proceeding. In this circumstance, there is no § 1983 supervisory

liability. T hompkins v. Belt

, 828 F.2d 298, 303-04 (5th Cir.

1987).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 105 

To direct the General Accountability Office to conduct a full audit of hurricane protection funding and cost estimates associated with post-Katrina 

hurricane protection. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 23 (legislative day, JANUARY 3), 2013 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To direct the General Accountability Office to conduct a 

full audit of hurricane protection funding and cost estimates associated with post-Katrina hurricane protection. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUDIT OF HURRICANE PROTECTION FUNDING 

4 AND COST ESTIMATES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 270 days after the 

6 date of enactment of this Act, the Government Account7 ability Office, in coordination with the National Academy 

8 of Engineering, shall conduct and submit to Congress a 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•S 105 IS

1 full audit of hurricane protection funding and cost esti2 mates associated with post-Katrina hurricane protection. 

3 (b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the audit shall be— 

4 (1) to identify the causes for the extraordinary 

5 miscalculations in cost estimates of damage caused 

6 by Hurricane Katrina that were completed before 

7 the date of enactment of this Act; 

8 (2) to conduct an analysis of resources available 

9 and work required with respect to hurricane protec10 tion funding and post-Katrina hurricane protection; 

11 and 

12 (3) to identify strategies to replenish repro13 grammed funding from out-year work to immediate 

14 needs. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with
# C_2021502EN.01001302.xml

| 13.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 502/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 502/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Belgium) lodged on 24 September 2021 — NY v Herios SARL

(Case C-593/21)

(2021/C 502/21)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: NY

Respondent: Herios SARL

Question referred

Must Article 17(2)(a), first indent, of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents (1) be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that in the present case, the goodwill indemnity payable to the main agent by reference to the number of customers brought in by the subagent does not provide ‘a substantial benefit’ to the main agent?

---

(1)  OJ 1986 L 382, p. 17.

---
5 May 2016

Mr. Steven Niedzielski

5047 E. Roy Rogers Road

Cave Creek, AZ 85331

Dear Mr. Niedzielski:

This is in response to your September 10, 2015, letter posted to the docket 

(FAA−2015−3822) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption 

from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). You requested to conduct promotional 

photography and videography services using an unmanned aerial system.

The information you submitted did not comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.81. On

November 24, 2015, the FAA sent you a letter stating that we were unable to process your 

request without further information. Specifically, we asked you to provide the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief and the extent of 

the relief you seek.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it 

would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

On April 11, 2015, the FAA received additional information. The FAA has reviewed the 

information and finds that you did not provide the sections from which you seek relief, how 

granting the request would provide a level of safety and why granting the request would be in 

the public interest.
2

Because your petition lacks sufficient information to proceed, the FAA has closed your 

exemption request. Should you wish to provide the additional information, please resubmit 

your petition for exemption to the public docket.

Sincerely,

\s\

Lirio Liu

Director, Office of Rulemaking
OFFICER EMPLOYMENT CONTINUATION AGREEMENT

Network Equipment Technologies, Inc. ("the Company") and the undersigned
("Officer"), in partial consideration for their continuing officer and
employment relationship and to encourage continued employment in the event of a
potential Change of Control, agree as follows:

1. In the event of Termination of Employment of Officer resulting from a
Corporate Transaction, Change of Control or Hostile Take-Over (as those terms
are defined in the 1993 Stock Option Plan, collectively referred to in this
Agreement as "Change of Control") or from involuntary termination for reasons
other than cause, the Company will provide severance benefits as follows:

     a.   one year of Officer's base salary ("salary continuance"),
     b.   one year of Officer's variable compensation (computed using the
          mid-point of the applicable range and the company "meets plan"),
     c.   Officer level medical, dental, life and disability insurance during
          the period of salary continuance, and
     d.   vesting of outstanding stock options and restricted stock awards
          during the period of salary continuance.

2. "Termination of Employment" of Officer occurs when one of the following
occurs: he or she is terminated without cause, job location is changed more than
50 miles, his or her compensation is materially reduced or responsibilities are
substantially altered or reduced (without express consent of the employee) by
the Company, or by any successor to the Company in conjunction with or within
one year after the close of a Change of Control.

3. In the event of a Termination Of Employment in conjunction with a Change of
Control, then vesting of outstanding stock options and restricted stock held by
Officer shall accelerate at the time of such Termination. All vested options
shall be exercisable for the duration of the life of the option.

4. In order to receive the foregoing, Officer agrees to execute the Company's
release and non-competition agreement at the time of any such Termination of
Employment.

Agreed this 30 day of October, 1995.

NETWORK EQUIPMENT                         Raymond E. Peverell       
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.                      -----------------------
                                        (Print Name of Officer)


By: /s/ Joseph J. Francesconi           /s/ R.E. Peverell
    -------------------------           -----------------
                                        (Signature)
Title: President & CEO
       ---------------------

October 26, 1995                                             N.E.T. Confidential
Red arrows or text indicate “blanks” thatwe’d like to fill in—either flows from onebox to the next or a calculation/description of therecycling/reuse processesgoing on at a given stage.CWIS 1 (3WTP)CWIS 2 (SWPH)Backup/supplement to#1, also firewaterOnce-throughNCCWVarious systemsWater TreatmentDischargeCooling towermakeup waterBoiler feedwaterBlowdownEvaporationVarious processusesSteam injections, etc.Various recoveryprocessesEffluent treatmentDischargeGirard PointCWIS 1 (N&SLoop)CWIS 2? (N Yard)Data indicates 2, but Ionly recall seeing oneWater TreatmentCooling towermakeup waterBoiler feedwaterBlowdownEvaporationVarious processusesSteam injections, etc.Various recoveryprocessesEffluent treatmentDischargePoint Breeze

# Copyrighted page/s removed. Copyrighted

material is not available in Regulations.gov since

it may not be reproduced without consent of the

copyright holder.

Please contact the EPA Docket Center, Public

Reading Room to view this document.

Address: 1301 Constitution Ave, NW

Room 3334

Washington, DC 20004

Telephone: 202-566-1744

Fax: 202-566-9744

Email: docket-customerservice@epa.gov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      35,291,000
<SECURITIES>                                55,881,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               42,136,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   656,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           146,849,000
<PP&E>                                      26,385,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,019,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             175,819,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       42,897,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        26,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  63,667,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               175,819,000
<SALES>                                     63,435,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           115,698,000
<CGS>                                          856,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               30,007,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,736,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (449,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,870,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,319,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,319,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($0.13)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET FOR MARCH 31, 1998 AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       8,528,875
<SECURITIES>                                11,188,744
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,224,757
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,762,869
<INVENTORY>                                    477,051
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            39,756,248
<PP&E>                                      14,397,988
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,636,140
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              55,268,539
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,811,554
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       103,580
<OTHER-SE>                                  51,208,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                55,268,539
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,613,795
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,047,992
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,471,485
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               605,995
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,258
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                824,395
<INCOME-TAX>                                   313,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            511,395
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   511,395
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     $.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     $.05
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33256-33257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15314]


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

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE:  9:30 a.m., Tuesday, August 7, 2018.

PLACE:  NTSB Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 
20594.

[[Page 33257]]


STATUS:  The one item is open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
57568 Highway Accident Report--Collision Between Freight Train and 
Charter Motorcoach at High-Profile Highway-Railroad Grade Crossing, 
Biloxi, Mississippi, March 7, 2017 (HWY17MH010)

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:  Telephone: (202) 314-6100.
    The press and public may enter the NTSB Conference Center one hour 
prior to the meeting for set up and seating.
    Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact 
Rochelle McCallister at (202) 314-6305 or by email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#efbd808c878a83838ac1a28cac8e8383869c9b8a9daf819b9c8dc1888099"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4e1c212d262b22222b60032d0d2f2222273d3a2b3c0e203a3d2c60292138">[email protected]</span></a> by Wednesday, August 1, 2018.
    The public may view the meeting via a live or archived webcast by 
accessing a link under ``News & Events'' on the NTSB home page at 
www.ntsb.gov.
    Schedule updates, including weather-related cancellations, are also 
available at www.ntsb.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Candi Bing at (202) 314-6403 or by 
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fe9c9790999dbe908a8d9cd0999188"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ed8f84838a8ead83999e8fc38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR MEDIA INFORMATION CONTACT:  Peter Knudson at (202) 314-6100 or by 
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d0a0b5a4b5a2febbbea5b4a3bfbe90bea4a3b2feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1464716071663a7f7a6170677b7a547a6067763a737b62">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: July 13, 2018.
LaSean McCray,
Assistant Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018-15314 Filed 7-13-18; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 7533-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
April 30, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

BETTY GETERS, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00045-CV V.

THE BAYTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, The Baytown 

Housing Authority, signed October 26, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the 

record. We have inspected the record and find the trial court erred in its judgment. 

We therefore order the judgment of the court below REVERSED and RENDER a 

take-nothing judgment against The Baytown Housing Authority and in favor of 

Betty Geters, dissolving any writ of possession that may have issued.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellee, The Baytown Housing Authority.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Document

Exhibit 10.24



						
		
	February 16, 2021	Par Technology Corporation
		8383 Seneca Turnpike
		New Hartford, NY 13413
	Mr. Saveneet Singh	P 800.448.6505

	c/o PAR Technology Corporation	www.partech.com
	8383 Seneca Turnpike	
	New Hartford, New York 13413	
		
	Re:      Amendment; Employment Letter (“Amendment”)




Dear Savneet:


            Your Employment Letter dated February 27, 2020 (“Employment Letter”) with PAR Technology Corporation (the “Company”) is amended as set forth below in this Amendment. Capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Employment Letter.  


            Your annual base salary will be $575,000 and Section 4. (Short Term Incentive) of the Employment Letter is amended to increase your annual STI bonus threshold, target, and maximum payout for each of the Company’s fiscal years ending December 31, 2021 and 2022 from 80% (threshold), 90% (target), and 100% (maximum) to 90% (threshold),100% (target) and 110% (maximum) of your base salary earned in each of the foregoing fiscal years. Accordingly, the third sentence of Section 4. (Short Term Incentive) of the Employment Letter is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: “Your annual STI bonus threshold, target, and maximum payout for the Company’s fiscal year ending (a) December 31, 2021 (“FY 2021”) shall be 90% (threshold), 100% (target) and 110% (maximum) of your base salary earned in FY 2021, and (b) December 31, 2022 (“FY 2022”) shall be 90% (threshold), 100% (target) and 110% (maximum) of your base salary earned in FY 2022.”


            Except as set forth in this Amendment and as amended hereby, all other terms and provisions of the Employment Letter shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. If you agree with the terms of this Amendment, please evidence your agreement by signing and dating this Amendment in the space indicated below and return it to me. Feel free to contact me if you have questions or if you need any additional information. 
                                                                        Sincerely, 


                                                                        PAR Technology Corporation






                                                                        By: __/s/ Bryan Menar________________
                                                                        Name: Bryan A. Menar
Agreed and Accepted to:                                   Title: Chief Financial Officer


_/s/ Savneet Singh______________________                 
Savneet Singh
February 16, 2021
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1685

GLENN MYER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BRUCE D. WHITE; BRETT KASSABIAN; GRACE BURKE CARROLL; J. 

GALLAHUE; MARK JUDGE,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

MARK SIMMONS; LISA MAYNE; JANE DOES, at the District Court Protective 

Order department; CHRISTOPHER BARR; JOSH SILVER; OMAR MERCEDES; 

JACOB POPE; CONNOR DELGADO,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00545-AJT-JFA)

Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2018

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Glenn Myer, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Glenn Myer appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions for injunctive 

relief, dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action, and denying reconsideration. To 

the extent that Myer seeks to appeal the denial of his request for a temporary restraining 

order, we are without jurisdiction to consider his appeal. See Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 

538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir. 1976). For the remainder of Myer’s claims, we have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed 

in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Myer v. White, 

No. 1:18-cv-00545-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. May 21, 2018 & June 8, 2018). We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in 

the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART;

AFFIRMED IN PART
Exhibit 10.7
 EVERGREEN SOLAR, INC.
     
    
    ES-A-200: 1.61 / Wp
    
    ES-A-205: 1.64/ Wp
    
    ES-A-210: 1.67/ Wp
    
    ES-A 200-B: 1.48/ Wp
    
    ES-A 205-B: 1.51/ Wp
    
    ES-A 210-B: 1.54/ Wp
 Evergreen Solar, Inc.
    
    Wagner & Co Solartechnik GmbH
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Joseph J. Ueberroth

Joseph J. UeberrothChairman, President andChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)May 6, 2008
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.