alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.6



             This document constitutes part of a prospectus covering
                 securities that have been registered under the
                             Securities Act of 1933


                ELECTION TO RECEIVE STOCK UNITS IN LIEU OF BONUS


         The undersigned employee hereby elects to have $__________ of the bonus
earned by the undersigned for 1999 performance (the "Bonus Amount") paid in the
form of _________ Stock Units. The Stock Units will convert on a one for one
basis to shares of Common Stock of the Company on ___________________ or the
earlier termination of the undersigned's employment with the Company.

         Any distribution on the Common Stock shall either be distributed to the
undersigned or the number of Stock Units shall be equitably adjusted. The number
of Stock Units shall also be equitably adjusted for stock splits and similar
events. These and all other matters relating to the Stock Units shall be
determined by the Board of Directors of the Company or the Compensation
Committee of that board. All determinations by the board or the committee shall
be final and binding on all persons.

         Twenty percent of the Stock Units and any distributions on these units
will be forfeited if the undersigned terminates the undersigned's employment
with the Company without Good Reason prior to December 31, 2002. Good Reason
shall be defined as it is defined in the undersigned's employment contract with
the Company if there is such a contract. If there is not such a contract, Good
Reason shall be a substantial reduction in the undersigned's compensation or
general level of responsibilities or the undersigned's death or permanent full
disability.

         The undersigned understands that the Bonus Amount is current taxable
ordinary income and that the then value of the Common Shares issued upon the
conversion of the Stock Units in excess of the Bonus Amount will be taxable
ordinary income at the time of such conversion.

         This election is made as of this 31st day of January, 2000. It will not
be effective until accepted by the Company.


                                            ----------------------------
                                                      employee

         This election is hereby accepted by Company as authorized by the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.


                                            -----------------------------
August 3, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5717 

The constitutional authority on which this 

bill rests is Article XIV of the Constitution, 

which enumerates that no United States Citizen can be ‘‘deprived of life, liberty, property, without due process of law.’’ The bill 

will assert Congress’ responsibility to defend 

the rights included in the Bill of Rights of 

the Constitution. 

By Mr. KUCINICH: 

H.R. 6358. 

Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: 

Article 1, Section 8, Clause III of the Constitution. 

ADDITIONAL SPONSORS 

Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors 

were added to public bills and resolutions as follows: 

H.R. 1742: Mr. RANGEL and Ms. BASS of 

California. 

H.R. 2524: Mr. LUJA ́ N and Mr. SERRANO. 

H.R. 3067: Mr. BLUMENAUER and Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. 

H.R. 3713: Mrs. ELLMERS. 

H.R. 4212: Mr. MARKEY. 

H.R. 6241: Mr. FATTAH, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. DAVIS of 

Illinois, Ms. CHU, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Ms. FUDGE, Mr. ENGEL, Ms. 

CLARKE of New York, Mr. MEEKS, Mr. ACKERMAN, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia, 

Ms. LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ of California, Mr. 

BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. ROTHMAN of New 

Jersey, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. DOYLE, Mrs. 

CHRISTENSEN, Ms. BASS of California, Mr. ANDREWS, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. FARR, Mrs. 

NAPOLITANO, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, and Mr. LEVIN. 

H.R. 6290: Mr. JONES and Mr. RIBBLE. 

H.R. 6292: Mr. ROHRABACHER. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kevin M. Caputo, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered April 18, 1990, convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s request to call an alibi witness, which application was made immediately prior to the commencement of jury selection. The defendant did not proffer a reasonable excuse for his failure to file a timely "notice of alibi” pursuant to CPL 250.20 (1), and the prosecutor established that because the crime took place 20 months prior to *291the request, it would be unduly burdensome for the People to locate any witnesses to refute the proposed testimony of the defendant’s alibi witness that the defendant was at a bar at the time of the crime *(see, People v Marshall,*170 AD2d 463; *People v Corpas,*150 AD2d 710, 711-715; *People v Bunting,*134 AD2d 646, 648-649; *People v Peralta,*127 AD2d 803; *cf, People v Peterson,*96 AD2d 871).

The defendant’s other contentions are without merit. Hooper, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
#### WYOMING FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. Darrell VANNELLI and Rosalie Vannelli, Appellees (Defendants below).

No. 3103.

Supreme Court of Wyoming.

April 18, 1962.

Henderson, Godfrey & Kline, Cheyenne, for appellant.

G. Joseph Cardine, Casper, for appel-lees.

Before BLUME, C. J., and PARKER, HARNSBERGER and McINTYRE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a notice of appeal dated and served November 9, 1961, appellant has attempted to appeal to this court from an oral order made in open court directing a verdict in favor of opposing parties. Appellees have moved to dismiss such appeal on the ground that notice of appeal was premature. The alleged order is not an appealable order, and no judgment or final order, as defined by Rule 72(a), Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, was entered until December 6, 1961.

For the reasons set forth in the following opinions, it is apparent that this court has no jurisdiction to consider appellant’s appeal: Hahn v. Citizens’ State Bank, 25 Wyo. 467, 171 P. 889, 893, 172 P. 705; Culbertson v. Ainsworth, 26 Wyo. 214, 181 P. 418; Fertile Valley Canal Co. v. Kearney, 37 Wyo. 475, 263 P. 620; In re Pringle’s Estate, 51 Wyo. 352, 67 P.2d 204, 205, 110 A.L.R. 987.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2020230EN.01001201.xml

| 13.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/12

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 23 April 2020 — European Commission v Republic of Finland

(Case C-217/19) (1)

(Action for failure to fulfil obligations - Directive 2009/147/EC - Conservation of wild birds - Authorisations for spring hunting of male specimens of the ‘common eider’ bird species (Somateria mollissima) in the province of Åland (Finland) - Article 7(4) and Article 9(1)(c) - Concepts of ‘judicious use’ and ‘small numbers’)

(2020/C 230/15)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes and E. Ljung Rasmussen, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski, acting as Agent, and J. Bouckaert, D. Gillet and S. François, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by recurrently granting authorisations for spring hunting of male common eiders (Somateria mollissima) in the province of Åland since 2011 and up to and including 2019, the Republic of Finland failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(4) and Article 9(l)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by recurrently granting authorisations for spring hunting of male common eiders (Somateria mollissima) in the province of Åland since 2011 and up to and including 2019, the Republic of Finland failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(4) and Article 9(l)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.

---
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

105 

KA 10-02430 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DAVID L. GARDINER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PHILIP ROTHSCHILD OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DAVID L. GARDINER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (STEFANIE GRUBER,

VICTORIA M. WHITE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Onondaga County Court (Joseph E.

Fahey, J.), entered November 16, 2010. The order determined that

defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender

Registration Act. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he

is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act

([SORA] Correction Law § 168 et seq.). We reject defendant’s

contention that County Court erred in assessing 30 points against him

under risk factor 3, for having three or more victims. Defendant was

charged with sexually abusing three children, including his 11-yearold daughter. Although defendant pleaded guilty only to those counts

of the indictment relating to the abuse of his daughter, it is well

settled that, in determining the number of victims for SORA purposes,

the hearing court is not limited to the crime of which defendant was

convicted (see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment

Guidelines and Commentary, at 5 [2006]; § 168-n [3]; People v Callan,

62 AD3d 1218, 1218-1219). Here, in making its determination, the

court was entitled to consider “reliable hearsay evidence,” including

the case summary, which supported the court’s determination as to the

number of victims (§ 168-n [3]; see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563,

572-573; People v Baker, 57 AD3d 1472, lv denied 12 NY3d 706). 

Defendant’s contention that the court should have granted a

downward departure to a level two risk is not preserved for our review

because defendant did not request a downward departure (see People v

Ratcliff, 53 AD3d 1110, lv denied 11 NY3d 708). Finally, contrary to
-2- 105 

KA 10-02430 

the contention raised by defendant in his pro se supplemental brief,

the court properly assessed 25 points against him under risk factor 2,

for having deviate sexual intercourse with at least one of the

victims. Although defendant was not convicted of having deviate

sexual intercourse with his daughter, the case summary states that he

had deviate sexual intercourse with the other two victims, and the

indictment charges him with having deviate sexual intercourse with one

of them. Moreover, the indictment was presumably based upon the

victims’ grand jury testimony, which also constitutes reliable hearsay

(see People v Howard, 52 AD3d 273, lv denied 11 NY3d 706). 

Entered: February 10, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Krupp Government Income Trust(the “Trust”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Alan Reese, Chief Accounting Officer of the Trust,certify, pursuant to U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2)          The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Trust as of December 31, 2002 (the last date of the periodcovered by the Report).

 

 
| /s/ Alan  Reese           |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
| Alan Reese,               |
| Chief  Accounting Officer |

 

1

----
**Exhibit      8.1**

**Significant      Subsidiaries of Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.**

| **Name                of Subsidiary**                                |   | **Country of Incorporation** |    |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|---------|
| SQM                Industrial S.A.                                   |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| SQM                Nitratos S.A.                                     |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| SQM                Salar S.A.                                        |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| Minera                Nueva Victoria S.A.                            |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| Servicios                Integrales de Transito y Transferencia S.A. |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| Soquimich                Comercial S.A.                              |   |                                   | Chile   |   |
| SQM                North America Corp.                               |   |                                   | USA     |   |
| SQM                Europe N.V.                                       |   |                                   | Belgium |   |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4407 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4407

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 3s101 Rockwell Street in Warrenville, Illinois, as the ``Corporal 
             Jeffery Allen Williams Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CORPORAL JEFFERY ALLEN WILLIAMS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3s101 Rockwell Street in Warrenville, Illinois, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Corporal Jeffery Allen Williams Post 
Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Corporal 
Jeffery Allen Williams Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 16, 2018.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
115th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4407

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 3s101 Rockwell Street in Warrenville, Illinois, as the ``Corporal 
             Jeffery Allen Williams Post Office Building''.
```
Exhibit 10.3

                    SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


     THIS  AMENDMENT,  dated as of the 21st day of July,  1998,  by and  between
BUCKHEAD AMERICA CORPORATION ("Company"), a Delaware corporation, and DOUGLAS C.
COLLINS ("Executive").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:


     WHEREAS,  Company  and  Executive  entered  into  that  certain  Employment
Agreement dated July 1, 1993 ("Agreement"  providing for employment of Executive
by the Company; and

     WHEREAS,  Company and Executive desire to enter into this Amendment for the
purpose of evidencing  their mutual  understanding  and agreement  regarding the
extension of the term of Executive's employment by the Company and certain other
matters relating to such employment as set forth herein below.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  for  and in  consideration  of the  mutual  premises  and
covenants  contained  herein  and other  good and  valuable  consideration,  the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Company and Executive,
intending to be legally bound, agree as follows:

     1.   Defined  Terms.  All terms used  herein and  denoted by their  initial
          capitalization  shall have the meanings set forth in the  Agreement or
          First Amendment unless set forth herein to the contrary.

     2.   Extension of  Employment  Term.  The term of  employment  described at
          Section 4 of the Agreement shall be extended to July 31, 2002.

     3.   Definition  of Base Salary.  The  definition of Base Salary only as it
          pertains  to Section  4B of The  Agreement  shall be  amended  and the
          following definition shall apply:

          "Base  Salary" - Base  Salary  shall be  defined  for the  purpose  of
          Section 4B as the  Executive's  annual salary plus the average  annual
          bonus for the two years proceeding termination plus the annual cost of
          group insurance.

     4.   Continued Validity.  Except as specifically  amended by this Amendment
          as herein  above  provided,  all other  terms  and  conditions  of the
          Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.



1216296v1
<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the parties  have set their  hands and affixed  their
seals to this  Amendment  to be  effective  as of the day and year  first  above
written.


COMPANY:                                EXECUTIVE:

Buckhead America Corporation



BY: /s/ Robert M. Miller                 /s/ Douglas C. Collins
    --------------------------           ----------------------------
Title: Chairman                          Douglas C. Collins
# AMERICAN AIRLINES

February 3, 2012

Esta Rosenberg , Chief

U.S. C arrier Licensing Division

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Amer ican Airlines

, Application for U.S.

- Brazil

Freque ncies (Miami

- Manaus), DOT

- OST

- 2011

- 0086

Dear Ms. Rosenberg :

We have completed our poll of the carrier parties

served wi th the captioned application on January 25, 2012

. There are no objections. Accordingly, we reques t favorable

action on an exped ited basis.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________ CARL B. NELSON

Associate General Counsel

American Airlines, Inc.

1101 17th Street, N.W.

Suite 600

Washington, D.C. 20590

(202) 496

- 5647

carl.nelson@aa.com

cc: Docket Branch

Brian Hedberg

Service list
EXHIBIT 99.1


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter ended March 31, 2002, (the "Report") by Chopin Venture Group, Inc., the
undersigned hereby certifies that:

1.   The Report complies in all material respects with the requirements of
     Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 the operations of the
     Registrant.


Dated:  September 20, 2002

                                   /s/ Daryl Desjardins
                                   -------------------------------
                                   Name: Daryl Desjardins
                                   Title:  Chief Executive Officer


                                   /s/ Daryl Desjardins
                                   -------------------------------
                                   Name: Daryl Desjardins
                                   Title:  Chief Financial Officer
# C_2008183EN.01002901.xml

| 19.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/29

---

Action brought on 22 May 2008 — Interflon v OHIM — Illinois Tool Works (FOODLUBE)

(Case T-200/08)

(2008/C 183/54)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Interflon BV (Roosendaal, Netherlands) (represented by: S. M. Wertwijn, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Illinois Tool Works Inc. (Glenview, United States)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 March 2008 in case R 638/2007-2; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 March 2008 in case R 638/2007-2; and

| — | grant applicant's request for the cancellation of the Community trade mark concerned. |
| --- | --- |

—

grant applicant's request for the cancellation of the Community trade mark concerned.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘FOODLUBE’ for goods in classes 1 and 4 — registration No 1 647 734

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Refusal of the request for the declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the trade mark concerned is devoid of any distinctive character; infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation 40/94 as the trade mark concerned is not capable of distinguishing the indicated goods in terms of their origin.

Pleas in law:

---
May 10, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Meeting with Chem-Mod 

Attendees: 

EPA: 

William H. Maxwell, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG 

Nick Hutson, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG 

Barrett Parker, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MPG 

Mary Johnson, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG (by phone) 

Christian Fellner, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG (by phone) 

Erich Eschmann, EPA/OAP/CAMD (by phone) 

Chem-Mod: 

Sally Wasikowski, Chem-Mod 

Liz Williamson, Winston & Strawn 

Ralph Roberson, RMB Consulting 

Mark Frentrup, Harness, Dickey, & Pierce 

Jay Holloway, Winston & Strawn 

Discussion: 

Chem-Mod provided information on their process for mercury removal from the exhaust gas 

stream of coal-fired EGUs. They indicated that comments would be provided on the proposed 

rule with suggested changes to the text of the regulation so as not to preclude their type of 

process from being used for compliance with the proposed Toxics Rule.