alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1

          SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     THIS  SECOND  AMENDMENT  (this  "Amendment")  is made as of this 4th day of
April, 2005 to that certain AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT,  dated as
of May 15, 2002, as amended (the "Employment  Agreement"),  by and between DAVID
E. ULLMAN ("Employee") and JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC. ("Employer").

     FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,  the receipt and adequacy of which are
hereby  acknowledged,  Employer  and  Employee,  being the sole  parties  to the
Employment Agreement, hereby amend the Employment Agreement as follows:

          1.  Subject  to  earlier  termination   otherwise  set  forth  in  the
     Employment  Agreement,  the  last  day of the  Employment  Period  shall be
     January 31, 2007.

          2.  Effective  February  27,  2005,  Employee's  Base Salary  shall be
     $295,000.00.

     Except as  specifically  amended  hereby,  the Employment  Agreement  shall
remain in full force and  effect  according  to its terms.  To the extent of any
conflict  between the terms of this  Amendment and the terms of the remainder of
the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control and prevail.
Capitalized  terms used but not  defined  herein  shall  have  those  respective
meanings  attributed to them in the Employment  Agreement.  This Amendment shall
hereafter be deemed a part of the  Employment  Agreement for all  purposes.  The
terms of employment  set forth in this Amendment have been approved by the Audit
Committee of the Board of Directors of the Employer.

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


JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.

By: /s/ Robert N. Wildrick                  /s/ David E. Ullman
    ----------------------                  -------------------
      Robert N. Wildrick,                   DAVID E. ULLMAN
      Chief Executive Officer


                                       6
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: GUARDIANSHIP OF JOHN V.

WALTER, AN ALLEGED

INCAPACITATED PERSON

,

Appellant, §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 20

- 00206

- C V

Appeal from the

Probate Court

of Dallas County, Texas

(TC# PR

- 20

- 1181

- 1 )

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is an agreed motion to abate the appeal. The motion is

GRANTED, and the appeal is abated until May 9 , 2021 , to give the parties an opportunity to settle

the dispute. If the parties are able to finalize a settlement prior to May 9 , 2021 , the parties are

directed to notify the Court of that fact and to file an appropriate motion to dispose of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 9 t h day of April, 2021

.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
#### Application of Fred PIERCE on Writ of Habeas Corpus.

No. A-12948.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Oct. 19, 1960.

Duard C. Willoughby, Ada, Clarence Bowie, Pauls Valley, for petitioner.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Harvey Cody, County Atty., John Levergood, Special Prosecutor, Shawnee, for respondent.

BRETT, Judge.

This is an original action by petition for writ of habeas corpus by Fred Pierce to be allowed bail, which was denied petitioner by Honorable J. Knox Byrum, Judge of the District Court of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma.

Pierce was charged by information in the District Court of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma, with the crime of murder of Danny Martin allegedly committed on July 23, 1960, at Saint Louis, Oklahoma.

The Court of Criminal Appeals after having examined the transcript of evidence taken on August 21, 1960, before Honorable David D. Parsons, Justice of the Peace of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma, and having heard oral testimony, including testimony of the defendant, at the hearing conducted herein on August 24, 1960, it is of the opinion that the proof of guilt of the crime of murder is not evident nor the presumption thereof great that the petitioner would receive the death penalty or life imprisonment. Application of Peters, Okl.Cr., 351 P.2d 1020, 1021.

Under this record, the petitioner is entitled to bail. The Court of Criminal Appeals is of the opinion, after considera*378tion of the ’ petitioner’s inability to make large bond, that petitioner is the father of seven children, concerning one of whom this killing arose, and will be available for trial. The bond is set at $15,000.

It is therefore ordered that upon the approval of the District Court Clerk of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma, of a good and sufficient bond in the sum of $15,000, the petitioner is ordered to be released from the custody of the sheriff of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma, for appearance of trial of said cause on its merits and subject to the further order of the courts.

POWELL, P. J., and NIX, J., concur.
Exhibit
10.12
 MIP
 EXECUTIVE OFFICERS  FORM B
 ULTRATECH, INC.
 RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT ISSUANCE AGREEMENT
 RECITALS
    NOW, THEREFORE
 Grant of Restricted Stock Units
 AWARD SUMMARY
 Participant
 Award Date:
 Number of Shares
Subject to Award:
    
    shares of Common Stock (the Shares)Vesting Schedule:
    
    The Shares shall vest in a series
of  ()
successive equal annual installments upon the
Participants completion of each year of Service
over the  ()-year period measured from
. However, the Shares may vest in whole or
in part on an accelerated basis in accordance with
the provisions of Paragraphs 4 and 6 of this
Agreement.




---



##### 



Issuance Schedule
    
    The Shares in which the Participant vests in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the
foregoing Vesting Schedule will become issuable on
the date (the Issuance Date) upon which occurs the
earliestof the following:
(i)

,
(ii) the date of the Participants Separation from
Service or (iii) the closing date of a Qualifying
Change in Control. The actual issuance of the Shares
shall be subject to the Corporations collection of
all applicable Withholding Taxes and shall be
effected on the applicable Issuance Date or as soon
as administratively practicable thereafter, but in
no event later than the close of the calendar year
in which such Issuance Date occurs or (if later) the
fifteenth (15th) day of the third calendar month
following such Issuance Date, unless a further
deferral is required pursuant to Paragraph 9. The
procedures pursuant to which the applicable
Withholding Taxes are to be collected are set forth
in Paragraph 8 of this Agreement.
 Limited Transferability
 Cessation of Service
 Accelerated Vesting
  2




---



##### 



Stockholder Rights and Dividend Equivalents
  
 Change of Control
 earliest
 3




---



##### 



Adjustment in Shares
 Collection of Withholding Taxes
   4




---



##### 



provided, however
      Deferred Issue Date. earlier
 5




---



##### 



Benefit Limit. greater
 Compliance with Laws and Regulations
 Notices
 Successors and Assigns
 Construction
 Governing Law
 6




---



##### 



Employment at Will
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 ULTRATECH, INC.By:Title:PARTICIPANTSignature:Address:
 7




---



##### 



MIP
 APPENDIX A
 DEFINITIONS
  Agreement
 Award
 Award Date
 Board
 Change in Control
     A-1




---



##### 



Code
 Common Stock
 Corporation
 Employee
 Fair Market Value
 Involuntary Termination
  provided, however,
 A-2




---



##### 



1934 Act
 Participant
 Parent
 Permanent Disability
 Plan
 Plan Administrator
 Qualifying Change in Control
 Restricted Stock Unit
 Separation from Service
 A-3




---



##### 



Service provided, however
   A-4




---



##### 



Stock Exchange
 Subsidiary
 Termination for Cause
   nolo contendere
    A-5




---



##### 



Withholding Taxes
 A-6
<PAGE>


Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SS. 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form, 10-Q (the "Report") of Amaru,
Inc. (the "Company"), for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Colin Binny, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Colin Binny
-------------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2009
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 123 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H5931-H5932]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        WE NEED A FARM BILL NOW

  (Mr. CRAWFORD asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute.)
  Mr. CRAWFORD. During the month of August, I traveled throughout my 
Arkansas district, listening to the challenges family farmers are 
facing with record drought conditions. Even though the House did pass 
an important drought relief package, we need to

[[Page H5932]]

pass a farm bill. We must acknowledge the role that farm families play 
in our Nation's economy.
  The success story of Arkansas and American agriculture can continue 
if Congress acts to pass sound policies. The message from my 
constituents and rural America is clear: We need a farm bill now. The 
farm bill needs to be a priority of the House, as it is critically 
important not only to my home State of Arkansas but to all of rural 
America.
  At a time when many Americans have lost faith in the ability of 
Congress to accomplish great things, a comprehensive farm bill has the 
potential to be an example of what can be done when we put aside 
partisan politics and pass sound policy. We need a farm bill now.

                          ____________________
```
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,

# FIRSTCIRCUIT

BARBARA WALTERS, 

### AND MAJOR CHILDREN OF BARBARA WALTERS, GARY SLEDGE, NATALIE COUSIN AND DAWN SAXTON VERSUS C. SWAYZE RIGBY, M. D., 

### CARLTON H. SHEELY, 

### M. D., AND R. 

### SCOTT THURSTON, M. D. In Re:

BEFORE: C. Swayze 

### Rigby,

supervisory writs, Parish of East Baton NO. 

### 2024 CW 0137



### FEBRUARY 19, 

### 2024

M. D., and LAMMICO, 

### applying for 

### 19th Judicial District Court, Rouge, No. 

### 644004. THERIOT, PENZATO, 

### AND MILLER, JJ. WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. This writ application 

### is untimely. The return 

### date was 

### February 16, 

### 2024 at 

### 3: 00 p.m., but the application was 

## filed electronically at 

## 3:06 p.m. See Rule 

### 4- 3 of the Uniform Rules of Louisiana Courts of Appeal.



### Supplementation of this writ application and/ or an application for 

### rehearing will not be considered. Uniform Rules 

### of Louisiana Courts of Appeal, 

### Rules 2- 18. 7 & 4- 9. MRT AHP Miller, 

### J., would 

## deny the writ. The district court 

### is in 

## the best position to determine the admissibilityof the evidence for impeachmentpurposes duringtrial.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT



# ALf

I ---' 

# 4- DOPWCLERKOFCOURT

FOR THE COURT
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5708]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. YOUNG of Alaska:
       H.R. 6291.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2
       The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all 
     needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or 
     other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in 
     this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any 
     Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 125 (Monday, September 17, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S6391]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

        ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 10 A.M., WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2012

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate stands adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, September 19, 2012.
  Thereupon, the Senate, at 2 and 41 seconds p.m., adjourned until 
Wednesday, September 19, 2012, at 10 a.m.
```
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 Beard  Company's (the  "Company")  Annual Report on Form
10-K for the period ended  December 31, 2004, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,  William M. Beard,
Chairman  of the Board 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, to the best of my knowledge:

1.   The Report fully complies 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 operations of the Company.


Date:  March 28, 2005                 By:           /s/ William M. Beard
                                                       William M. Beard
                                                  Chairman of the Board and
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 60852 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JOSEPH TERRELL KELLY , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:02

- CR

- 146

- 2

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Defendant

- Appellant Joseph Terrell Kelly appeals the revocation of his supervised release. He contends that the district court erred in finding that he violated the conditions of his supervised release by committing the new criminal offense of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Kelly concedes that he was a convicted felon and was arrested in possession of a gun but asserts

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 24, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-60852 Document: 00514085272 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/24/2017No. 16

- 60852

2 that he was legally justified in possessing the gun because he took it to protect himself from an imminent threat of danger. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the g overnment, a reasonable trier of fact could have concluded that Kelly committ ed the offense of being a felon in possession of a firearm and was not entitled to the defense of justification

. See United States v. Alaniz

- A laniz , 3 8 F.3d 788, 792 (5th Cir. 1994)

. The evidence does not support the conclusion that Kelly had the gun in response to a n imminent threat of harm or that, in reacting to a reasonable and immediate fear for his life and safety, he temporarily possessed the gun in the course of defending himself. See United States v. Gant , 691 F.2d 1159, 1162 (5th Cir. 1982) ; United States v. Panter , 688 F.2d 268, 272 (5th Cir. 1 9 82)

. Neither does the record support a conclusion that there was a continuing
thr eat to Kelly’s

– or any other person’s

– life or safety when he was found with the gun approximately four hours after he first took possession of it. Kelly may
not assert the defense of justification whe n , as here, the re was not a real

emergency that left no time to seek a reasonable, legal alternative , and when
he had the firearm for a significant period after the purported time of endangerment. See Gant , 691 F.2d at 1163

- 64; Panter , 688 F.2d at 272

. In sum , there was sufficient evidence to support the conclusion t hat Kelly violated the conditions of his supervised release and that revocation was
merited

. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3); United States v. Jang , 574 F.3d 263, 265

- 67 (5th Cir. 2009). T he district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED

. Case: 16-60852 Document: 00514085272 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/24/2017
# C_2009032EN.01004702.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/47

---

Action brought on 2 December 2008 — Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa v Commission

(Case T-530/08)

(2009/C 32/91)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Territorio Histórico de Guipúzcoa — Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa (represented by: I. Sáenz-Cortabarría Fernández and M. Morales Isasi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declaration that the letter from the Directorate General of Competition of the European Commission D/53778 [COMP/H4/NM/ed D(2008) 247], of 2 October 2008, is null and void, in so far as it requires the interest referred to in Decisions 2002/894/EC and 2002/540/EC, of 11 July 2001 (infringement file 2007/2215), to be recovered on a compound basis; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Declaration that the letter from the Directorate General of Competition of the European Commission D/53778 [COMP/H4/NM/ed D(2008) 247], of 2 October 2008, is null and void, in so far as it requires the interest referred to in Decisions 2002/894/EC and 2002/540/EC, of 11 July 2001 (infringement file 2007/2215), to be recovered on a compound basis; and

| — | An order that the Commission should pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

An order that the Commission should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those put forward in Case T-529/08 Diputación Foral de Álava v Commission.

Diputación Foral de Álava

Commission

---
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 89480-89481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28508]


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

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD


Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board.

ACTION: Notice announcing updated penalty inflation adjustments for 
civil monetary penalties for 2024.

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

SUMMARY: As required by Section 701 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 
2015, entitled the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 
Improvements Act of 2015, the Railroad Retirement Board (Board) hereby 
publishes its 2024 annual adjustment of civil penalties for inflation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter J. Orlowicz, Senior Counsel, 
Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, IL 60611-
1275, (312) 751-4922, TTD (312) 751-4701.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 701 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of

[[Page 89481]]

2015, Public Law 114-74 (Nov. 2, 2015), entitled the Federal Civil 
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (the 2015 
Act), amended the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 
1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note) (Inflation Adjustment Act) to require 
agencies to publish regulations adjusting the amount of civil monetary 
penalties provided by law within the jurisdiction of the agency not 
later than January 15th of every year.
    For the 2024 annual adjustment for inflation of the maximum civil 
penalty under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, the Board 
applies the formula provided by the 2015 Act and the Board's 
regulations at Title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 356. In 
accordance with the 2015 Act, the amount of the adjustment is based on 
the percent increase between the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) for the 
month of October preceding the date of the adjustment and the CPI-U for 
the October one year prior to the October immediately preceding the 
date of the adjustment. If there is no increase, there is no adjustment 
of civil penalties. The percent increase between the CPI-U for October 
2023 and October 2024, as provided by Office of Management and Budget 
Memorandum M-24-07 (December 19, 2023), is 1.03241 percent. Therefore, 
the new maximum penalty under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act is 
$13,946 (the 2023 maximum penalty of $13,508 multiplied by 1.03241, 
rounded to the nearest dollar). The new minimum penalty under the False 
Claims Act is $13,946 (the 2023 minimum penalty of $13,508 multiplied 
by 1.03241, rounded to the nearest dollar), and the new maximum penalty 
is $27,894 (the 2023 maximum penalty of $27,018 multiplied by 1.03241, 
rounded to the nearest dollar). The adjustments in penalties will be 
effective December 27, 2023.

    Dated: December 21, 2023.

    By Authority of the Board.
Stephanie Hillyard,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 2023-28508 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4441 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4441

To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to prohibit certain waivers and 
   exemptions from emergency preparedness and response and security 
                              regulations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 16, 2017

  Mrs. Lowey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to prohibit certain waivers and 
   exemptions from emergency preparedness and response and security 
                              regulations.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Safe and Secure Decommissioning Act 
of 2017''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN WAIVERS AND EXEMPTIONS.

    Chapter 19 of title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
2015 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 276 the following:

``SEC. 277. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN WAIVERS AND EXEMPTIONS.

    ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
            ``(1) Covered regulation.--The term `covered regulation' 
        means--
                    ``(A) an emergency preparedness or response 
                regulation or requirement; or
                    ``(B) a security regulation or requirement 
                applicable to spent nuclear fuel.
            ``(2) Licensee.--The term `licensee' has the meaning given 
        the term in section 50.2 of title 10, Code of Federal 
        Regulations (or any successor regulation).
    ``(b) Prohibition of Certain Waivers and Exemptions.--Subject to 
subsection (c), the Commission shall not approve the request of a 
licensee for a waiver of, or exemption from, a covered regulation 
applicable to a civilian nuclear power reactor that has permanently 
ceased to operate.
    ``(c) Limitation.--Subsection (b) shall not apply to a civilian 
nuclear power reactor described in that subsection at which all spent 
nuclear fuel has been transferred to spent nuclear fuel dry casks.''.
                                 <all>
```