alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w10



 






Exhibit 10.10




MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE PLAN




2005 Payable in 2006




	I.  	SPONSOR
	 
	   	FBL Financial Group, Inc. is the sponsor of the Management Performance Plan.
	 
	II.  	PARTICIPANTS
	 
	   	Participants in the plan include the senior executive group and executive group of FBL
Financial Group, Inc. as Tier I participants. Tier II participants include department heads
(salary grade 45). Tier III participants include managers (salary grade 44).
	 
	III.  	FEATURES






	 	A.  	Each year the Compensation Committee and board of directors approve five to
eight corporate goals. These performance goals include significant areas of
achievement such as number of property/casualty accounts, property/casualty and life
insurance new business production, expenses and earnings.
	 
	 	B.  	Each goal is given equal weight but may be split between life and
property/casualty performance.
	 
	 	C.  	Each goal is measured separately in the determination of the attainment level.
Generally goals for insurance management will be based on the performance over the
entire marketing area. Participants whose responsibilities are limited to a single
state or sales region will be measured according to the performance of that particular
territory.
	 
	 	D.  	Percentage of incentives to be paid will be calculated separately for each
performance goal and no incentive will be paid on a goal until at least 75% of its goal
level is attained.
	 
	 	E.  	The applicable performance incentive percentage for each goal will increase
proportionately for achievement above 75% of goal level to a maximum of 150% of goal,
resulting in an incentive percentage of from 75% to 150% for each goal.
	 
	 	F.  	For participants in Tier I, Group I, II and III, the applicable performance
incentive percentage for each goal will begin at 50% at performance of 75% of goal
level and increase proportionately to 200% at performance of 150% of goal level.
	 
	 	G.  	The performance incentive percentage will be applied to the participant’s base
salary paid during the plan year.





 








 





Exhibit 10.10





	 	H.  	The performance incentive percentage payable varies by tier and in some cases
by employee group within a tier as follows:
	 
	 	   	Tier I

Group I – 50%

Chief Executive Officer
	 
	 	   	Tier I

Group II — 40%

Chief Financial Officer; Executive Vice President, Farm Bureau Life; Executive Vice
President, Farm Bureau Mutual; Executive Vice President, EquiTrust Life
	 
	 	   	Tier I

Group III – 25%

Balance of insurance management team
	 
	 	   	Tier I

Group IV – 20%

Executive Group – Grade 50 employees
	 
	 	   	Tier II – All participants – 10%

Grade 45
	 
	 	   	Tier III – All participants – 8%

Grade 44
	 
	 	I.  	Payments of the performance incentive will be made annually to each participant
in a single, separate, lump sum payment on or before February 14 for the prior plan
year.
#### W. M. BOLIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 21307.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 16, 1940.

S. I. Pittman, of Corpus Christi, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is murder with malice. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for ninety-nine years.

Since perfecting his appeal, appellant has filed a written motion, duly verified by his affidavit, requesting the privilege of'withdrawing his appeal. The request is granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2007 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the exclusion 

for educational assistance programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 25, 2017 

Mr. FLAKE (for himself and Ms. CORTEZ MASTO) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the exclusion for educational assistance programs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Upward Mobility En5 hancement Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN EXCLUSION FOR EDUCATIONAL AS7 SISTANCE PROGRAMS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 127(a) 

9 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read 

10 as follows: 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2007 IS

1 ‘‘(2) MAXIMUM EXCLUSION.— 

2 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—This section shall 

3 apply only to the first $11,500 of educational 

4 assistance furnished to an individual during a 

5 calendar year. 

6 ‘‘(B) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—In the 

7 case of any calendar year after 2017, the 

8 $11,500 amount in subparagraph (A) shall be 

9 increased by an amount equal to— 

10 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

11 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de12 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal13 endar year in which such taxable year be14 gins by substituting ‘calendar year 2016’ 

15 for ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph 

16 (B) thereof. 

17 If any increase determined under this subpara18 graph is not a multiple of $50, such increase 

19 shall be rounded to the next lowest multiple of 

20 $50.’’. 

21 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

22 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

23 December 31, 2016. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
#### FRANKLIN v. STATE.

No. 21239.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 13, 1940.

Henry Taylor, of Temple, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant plead guilty in the district court of Bell County to a charge of burglary and, having waived a trial by jury, was assessed a penalty of three years in the penitentiary by the judge of the court.

The only evidence introduced in the case was the written confession of the appellant which he had previously made.

Article 10a of Vernon’s Annotated Code of Criminal Procedure provides that a defendant in a criminal prosecution for a felony less than capital shall have the right upon pleading guilty to waive a trial by jury. It is conditioned, however, that he must make a personal appearance in open court; that it must be with the approval of the court and of the attorney representing the state, entered of record. If he has no attorney the court must appoint one to represent him. Art. 12 of the Code further provides that it shall be necessary for the “State to introduce evidence into the record showing the guilt of the defendant * * *, and in no event shall the person charged be convicted upon his plea of guilty without sufficient evidence to support the same.” This provision is susceptible of no other construction than that herein given.

Upon a plea of guilty before the court in such cases the state must produce evidence sufficient to support the finding of guilt and the punishment assessed. The confession may be used to aid the proof of the corpus delicti, but not to establish it. An extrajudicial confession, alone, without proof of the corpus delicti is insufficient to sustain a conviction. The corpus delicti consists of two things — first, a criminal act, and second,the defendant’s agency in the commission of such act. Branch’s Annotated Penal Code, Sec. 1890, page 1049, and authorities there cited.

It will be observed that in this case there is no proof that the burglary was committed other than that which is cm-, braced in the confession itself. While a jury would be given the power to find -him guilty under such confession and plea the act of the legislature permitting a defendant to waive a jury specifically did not delegate to the court such power, but provided, to the contrary, that evidence must be heard.

Appellant’s contention must be sustained. The, judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case remanded.
```

                                                                                                 Exhibit 23.1
                                                                                                 ------------

                                          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No.
333-74838, 333-60408, 333-59272, 333-28481, 333-28527) of MedImmune, Inc. of our reports dated January 24,
2002, except for Notes 20 and 21 to the consolidated financial statements, as to which the date is March
27, 2002, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appear
in this Form 10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
March 28, 2002
McLean, Virginia
```
**MEMORANDUM**

**DATE:** 08/6 /2014 **FROM:** Laura Farris/EPA Region 8 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR – 2013
- 0602 **SUBJECT:** Alliance for Sustainable Colorado Sustainability Series held on 08/ 5 /2014 **SUMMARY :**  Laura Farris, EPA Region 8 Climate Change Coordinator, presented information on the proposed Clean Power Plan for E xisting Power Plants at the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado Sustainability Series event on 08/5 /2014
. The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES: EPA**  **Region 8** Laura Farris **External Stakeholders** Megan Moore Stribling , Events & Community Engagement Manager, Alliance for Sustainable Colorado Members of the Public
#### GRAY v. STATE.

No. 20697.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 25, 1939.

R. D. Oswalt, of Vernon, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for driving an automobile upon a public highway while intoxicated, punishment being 60 days in jail and a fine of $50.

The indictment properly charges the .offense. The record contains neither statement of facts nor bills of exception. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### General Services Administration

# AGENCY:

Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy is cancelling the constructions of the following Standard Form because of low user demand:

SF 1169, U.S. Government Transportation Requests (2-part set) (identified by NSN 7540-00-634-4363) and (4-part set book) (identified by NSN 7540-00-634-4365). The 4-part single set version (identified by NAN 7540-00-985-8038) of this form is still available from FSS.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

General Services Administration, Forms Management, (202) 501-0581.

# DATES: 

Effective December 5, 2000.

Dated: October 30, 2000.

Barbara M. Williams,

Deputy Standard and Optional Forms Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-30899 Filed 12-4-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-34-M
Exhibit 23.1   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM   We hereby consent to the inclusion of our report dated March 31, 2010, in Guardian Technologies International, Incs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (2009 Form 10-K), related to the consolidated financial statements of Guardian Technologies International, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and for each of the two years in the period then ended, which appear in Guardian Technologies International, Incs 2009 Form 10-K filed on or about March 31, 2010.  /s/ KBL, LLP New York, NY March 31, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD INDICATED AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                       3,878,447
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,111,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (153,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,294,119
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,835,487
<PP&E>                                      31,970,784
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,602,108
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              28,876,224
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,240,454
<BONDS>                                      1,340,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       137,235
<OTHER-SE>                                  20,923,569
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                28,876,224
<SALES>                                     46,338,793
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            46,338,793
<CGS>                                       33,531,734
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               41,876,184
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (191,454)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                55,451
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             240,864
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,357,748
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,690,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,667,748
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,667,748
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .93


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trimol Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.
 
 No purchaser or seller of securities or any other person shall be entitled to rely upon the foregoing certification for any purpose.  The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.
 
 
 /s/ Jack BravermanJack BravermanChief Financial OfficerTRIMOL GROUP, INC.
 
 
 May 21, 2010
 
 [A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Trimol Group, Inc. and will be retained by Trimol Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
#### FREE v. STATE.

No. 15678.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 8, 1933.

Barron & Ware, of Bryan, for appellant.

Dloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for seduction; punishment, 5 years in the penitentiary.

We are confronted at the threshold of this case with the question of a record in such shape as that we cannot consider the statement of facts or bills of exception. The motion for new trial was overruled June 6,1932, and the court then by order granted appellant 90 days in which to file bills of exception and statement of facts. This time expired September 4th. On August 30th the trial court entered another order extending the time for such filing 30 days. The statement of facts and bills of exception were filed on September 23d, nearly 20 days after the expiration of the 90-day period allowed by statute.

The trial court had no power or author*133ity to extend such time beyond that fixed by article 760, subd. 5, C. C. P., which is 90 days from the giving of notice of appeal. Said statute contains the following language: “The same shall not be so extended as to delay the filing thereof within ninety days from the date the notice of appeal is given.” Authorities upholding this statute are too numerous to cite, but many of them will be found under subdivisions 44, 45 of the notes to article 760, Vernon’s Ann. C. C. P.

The indictment, the charge of the court, the judgment and sentence are regular, and, being without power to consider either the statement of facts or bills of exception, the judgment will be affirmed.
* John T. B oyd, Ch ief Justice ( Ret.), Seventh Court o f Appeals , sitting by as sign ment. 1 Tex. R. A pp. P. 47.4. NO. 07-00-0490 -CR

IN THE COU RT OF APP EALS FOR THE SEVENT H DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMA RILLO PANE L E JANUA RY 8, 2003

______________________________ MARK ANTHONY BERNAL, APP ELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 17 6TH DIST RICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNT Y; NO. 743691; HON ORABLEBRIAN RAINS , JUDGE

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ. and BOYD, S.J. * MEM ORAN DUM OP INI ON 12

Pursuant to a plea bargain for

aggravated sex ual assault of a child, appellant was granted deferred adjudication and placed on com munity s upervision for ten years. Upon the State’s m otion to proceed with an ad judication of guilt, appel lant ple ad true to the allegations and thetria l cou rt a dj udicate d him guilty and senten ced himto ten years confinement

and a $500 fine. By t wo points of error , appe llant asser ts the trial court com mitted reversible error in assessing a ten-year sentence be cause it was not proportional to the offense co mm itted and violated his federal and state rights against cruel and unusual punishmen t. We hold that appellant did not preserve his com plaint s for app el la te re vi ew. Although article 42.12, section 5(b) of the Tex as Code of Criminal Procedure pe rmitsan appeal from assessm ent of punishment

after an adj udication of guilt, it is still neces sary to object atthe time punishment is assessed to preserve the com plaint. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(1)(A); see also Harde man v. State, 1 S .W.3d 689, 690 (Te x.C r.App. 1999). Appellant d id not objec t tothecou rt’ s as ses sm ent of aten -ye ar s ent enc e. T hus , his com plaint is waived. Appellant’s points of error are overruled. Accordingly, the j udgme nt of the trial court is affirmed. Per Curiam Do not publish.
1012 North Walnut Street Lansing, MI 48906 Phone: (517) 999

- 3475 Fax: (517) 999

- 3626

www.niowaveinc.com

March 26, 2012

Secretary of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportatio n 1200 New Jersey Ave, S E Washington, DC 2059 0

Subj: SUPPORT OF DOT

- OST

- 2012

- 0029

- 0001

Dear Secretary LaHood,

I am writing in support of Sun Country Airlines' application to provide nonstop service from Reagan National Airport (DCA) to Capitol City Airport (LAN). This new route would provide well

- timed, daily flights in the fourth largest DCA outside perimeter O& D market.

As an executive at Niowave, Inc., a worldwide leader in superconducting accelerator technology, I travel to Washington often to meet with Department of Energy and Department of Defense officials. I am currently faced with having connecting flig hts or driving several hours to a regional hub

-- both that add considerable cost to travel. The new proposed flights will provide the only convenient daytime

non

- stop service, offering much needed competition and low fares. Sun Country's two cabin service has proven very popular, and creates an important competitive advantage.

My personal experience with Sun County has been very positive, and it has established itself nationally for its attention to customer service . There is cu rrently only 1 daily round trip flight ( which is quite inconvenient for a one day trip). I believe Sun Country ’ s high quality service, and current limited slots both justify ad ding the new nonst op service out of DCA.

I respectfully ask that you grant Sun County's application for this new service.

Sincerely,

Jerry Hollister Chief Operating Officer
In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 6, 2018. 

Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 188) entitled 

‘‘An Act to prohibit the use of Federal funds for the costs 

of painting portraits of officers and employees of the Federal 

Government.’’, do pass with the following 

AMENDMENTS: 

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Eliminating Govern3 ment-funded Oil-painting Act’’ or the ‘‘EGO Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR PORTRAITS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter III of chapter 13 of 

6 title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

7 end the following: 

8 ‘‘§ 1355. Prohibition on use of funds for portraits 

9 ‘‘(a) No funds appropriated or otherwise made avail10 able to the Federal Government may be used to pay for the 

11 painting of a portrait of an officer or employee of the Fed12 eral Government, including the President, the Vice Presi13 dent, a Member of Congress, the head of an executive agency, 

14 or the head of an office of the legislative branch. 

15 ‘‘(b) In this section— 
2 

•S 188 EAH 

1 ‘‘(1) the term ‘executive agency’ has the meaning 

2 given the term in section 133 of title 41; and 

3 ‘‘(2) the term ‘Member of Congress’ includes a 

4 Delegate or Resident Commissioner to Congress.’’. 

5 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for 

6 subchapter III of chapter 13 of title 31, United States Code, 

7 is amended by adding after the item relating to section 1354 

8 the following new item: 

‘‘1355. Prohibition on use of funds for portraits.’’. 

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to amend 

title 31, United States Code, to prohibit the use of Federal funds for the costs of painting portraits of officers 

and employees of the Federal Government, and for other 

purposes.’’. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 188 

AMENDMENTS