alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED OCTOBER 5, 2011 

r-.rpARTMl^NT OF 

U.S. DEPARTN4ENT OF TRANSPORTA^OlSDRlM^^^^ 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS •.;OCiCl OP'cHAilOl-^ 

WASHINGTON, DC .. ^ D 7-U2 

2011 DCi -B P ^••'^^ 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

SUNSTATE 

PROPELLER INC., 

Respondent 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Proceeding) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0780 

ORDER 

GRANTING CONTINUANCE AND SETTING SECOND LITIGATION 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 

On Tuesday, October 4, 2011 the parties appeared by telephone for a Litigation 

Scheduling Conference. Mr. Eddie Thomas appeared on behalf of the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), and moved for a brief continuance of the Litigation Scheduling 

Conference, because the FAA counsel of record, Ms. Andrea Michelle Thomas, was not 

available. The parties discussed the status of the case, their calendar availability, and 

agreed to reconvene for a second litigation scheduling conference. 

It Is Hereby Ordered: 

1. The FAA's Motion for a Continuance was unopposed and is granted. 

2. The parties shall reconvene by telephone for a second litigation scheduling 

conference on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 at 2:30pin Eastern time. The 

Office of Hearings shall initiate the conference call. 

3. Prior to October 18, 2011, if the parties reach a settlement and wish to move 

to cancel the conference, they must file the necessary settlement withdrawal 

notice or other necessary documenl(s) with the Office of Hearings. 

J.EVSullivan, 

U.S.^^dnrinistrative Law Judge 

Attachment: Service List 
FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0780 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2WIOOO' 

ONE COPY 

Michael A. Hanson, Re.spondenl '.y Counsel 

HANSON Law Office 

2501 North Orient Road, Suite D 

Tampa, FL 33619 

TEL: 813-626-7304 

FAX: 813-62N6901 

Andrea Michelle Harper, Complainant's Counsel 

Southern Region 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

The Honorable J. E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20 ..... . 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2WI000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^30.
#### Liquor Salesmen, Bottle & Beverage Employees’ Union, Local No. 80, A. F. L., and others, Respondents, vs. Yahr-Lange Liquor, Inc., Appellant.*

*May 25*

July *1, 1948.*

*63*Maurice A. McCabe*of Milwaukee, for the appellant.

For the respondents there was a brief by N *G. Lippman*of Chicago, Illinois, and Padway, *Goldberg & Previant,*attorneys, and *David Previant*of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. Previant.*

*

 Motion for rehearing denied, with $25 costs, on September 14, 1948.

Rosenberry, C. J.

It is the contention of the Liquor Company that the arbitrators in making the award for services rendered prior to July 1,1945, exceeded their powers, and seek to have that part of the award complained of vacated.

Under the contract entered into between the parties to this controversy we can see no reason for disturbing the conclusion of the board of arbitration. As was pointed out, if the Liquor Company did not intend to assume liability for retro*64active pay, why was the date June 15, 1944, inserted? The language is :

> “The commission rates of this contract shall become effective on 15 day of June, 1944, and employees shall be entitled to retroactive'pay from such date in accordance with the provisions of this contract.”

By paragraph 15 of the contract each of the parties agreed that it would comply with the provisions of the arbitration award. It may well be, as counsel argues, that prior to the execution of the contract' there was no liability on the part of the Liquor Company for retroactive pay for the period they were employeés of the Drug Company. The Liquor Company is liable under its contract 'to make payment in accordance with its terms, although priorato the execution of the contract no legally enforceable liability may have existed against it.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.

Martin, J., took no part.
#### Frank, Appellant, vs. Schroeder, Respondent.

*September 9*

December *2, 1941.*

*161For the appellant there were briefs by *Harvey C. Hartwig*and *Chester J. Niebler,*both of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. Hartwig.*

For the respondent there were briefs by *Schmitz, Wild & Qross*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Edwin J, Gross.*

The following opinion was filed October 7, 1941:

Wickhem, J.

While briefs on this appeal are largely devoted to the question whether any triable issues of fact are presented by the record with respect to, (1) interpretation of guaranty; (2) the application of sec. 281.22, Stats., as a defense; and (3) nondelivery of the instrument, we deem this case determined at the outset adversely to appellant upon the issue of consideration.

The answer denies any consideration for defendant’s guaranty. No attack by affidavit is made upon the issue thus raised by defendant. It is plaintiff’s claim that as a matter of law no defense of want of consideration may be set up since the guaranty was under seal, and since, as held in *Jost v. Wolf,*130 Wis. 37, 110 N. W. 232; *Bibelhausen v. Bibelhausen,*159 Wis. 365, 150 N. W. 516; *Bradley Bank v. Pride,*208 Wis. 134, 242 N. W. 505, an instrument under 'seal conclusively imports consideration and the defense of no consideration raises an immaterial issue.

*162The vice in plaintiff’s argument is that the doctrine of these cases applies to executed contracts under seal. In *Singer v. General Acc., F. & L. Assur. Corp.*219 Wis. 508, 262 N. W. 702, it was pointed out that sec. 328.27, Stats., provides that with respect to an executory contract the seal shall be merely presumptive evidence of consideration. The seal is conclusive of consideration only in the case of executed contracts. It was therefore open to defendant to show that in fact there was no consideration for the execution of the guaranty and upon the record as it stands defendant has raised a legally material issue. There is nothing in the affidavits to indicate that it is not a substantial issue of fact. In view of this the trial court could not properly have entered a summary judgment and we consider it to be neither necessary nor expedient to consider the merits of the other contentions upon this appeal.

*By the Court.*— Order affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on December 2, 1941.
#### Schultz, Appellant, vs. Schultz, Respondent.

*March 15*

May *1, 1945.*

*J. E. O’Brien*of Fond du Lac, for the appellant.

For the respondent there was a brief by *Reilly & Cosgrove*of.Fond du Lac, and oral argument by *Frank W. Cosgrove.*

*Per*Curiam.

On the appeal it was sought to raise two questions: (1) Do the findings of fact and conclusions of law support the judgment? The ground upon which this contention is based is that the court did not find the specific dates upon which the several acts of adultery were committed by the plaintiff. The findings taken in connection with the undisputed evidence clearly'sustain the judgment.

The second contention is that the court did not properly divide the estate of the parties between them. The plaintiff *56was grossly at fault, a divorce having been granted for adultery. It is considered that the conclusion reached by the trial'court was right; No useful purpose would be served by setting out the details.

Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**as adopted pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Pzena Investment Management, Inc.(the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Richard S. Pzena, as ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: August 10, 2009 | /s/ RICHARD S. PZENA             |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                        |                             |
|                        | Name: Richard S. Pzena           |
|                        | Title: *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
# L_2012120EN.01001501.xml

| 5.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 120/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 120/15

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 2 May 2012

appointing a Spanish alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

(2012/242/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Spanish Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

| (2) | An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Timoteo MARTÍNEZ AGUADO, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Timoteo MARTÍNEZ AGUADO,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| — | Ms María del Mar ESPAÑA MARTÍ, Viceconsejera de la Consejería de Presidencia y Administraciones Públicas de la Junta de Comunidades de Castilla-La Mancha. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ms María del Mar ESPAÑA MARTÍ, Viceconsejera de la Consejería de Presidencia y Administraciones Públicas de la Junta de Comunidades de Castilla-La Mancha.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 2 May 2012.

For the Council

The President

M. VESTAGER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

2

---
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report ofSterling Oil and Gas Company(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period end ofMay 31, 2008as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,Richard G. Stifel,Chief Financial 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:

|(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|   
|    | Dated this 15th day of July, 2008.                                                                                                                   
|   

RICHARD G. STIFELRichard G. StifelChief Financial Officer





















---
# L_2012258EN.01003001.xml

| 26.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 258/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 258/30

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 24 September 2012

appointing two Cyprus members and three Cyprus alternate members of the Committee of the Regions

(2012/518/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Cyprus Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

| (2) | Two members’ seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Savvas ELIOFOTOU and Mr Evyenios MICHAIL. Three alternate members’ seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Andreas MOUSEOS, Mr Andreas HADZILOIZOU and Mr Christofis ANTONIOU, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Two members’ seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Savvas ELIOFOTOU and Mr Evyenios MICHAIL. Three alternate members’ seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Andreas MOUSEOS, Mr Andreas HADZILOIZOU and Mr Christofis ANTONIOU,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| (a) | as members:






  — | Ms Louisa MAVROMMÁTI, Αντιδήμαρχος 'Εγκωμης, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(a)

as members:

—

Ms Louisa MAVROMMÁTI, Αντιδήμαρχος 'Εγκωμης,

| — | Mr Louis KOUMENIDES, Πρόεδρος Κ.Σ. Κάτω Λευκάρων; |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Louis KOUMENIDES, Πρόεδρος Κ.Σ. Κάτω Λευκάρων;

and

| (b) | as alternate members:






  — | Mr Sávvas VÉRGΑS, Δήμαρχος Πάφου, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b)

as alternate members:

—

Mr Sávvas VÉRGΑS, Δήμαρχος Πάφου,

| — | Mr Glavkos KARIÓLOU, Δήμαρχος Κερύνειας, |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Glavkos KARIÓLOU, Δήμαρχος Κερύνειας,

| — | Mr Georgios IAKOVOU, Πρόεδρος Κ.Σ. Αγίων Τριμιθιάς. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Georgios IAKOVOU, Πρόεδρος Κ.Σ. Αγίων Τριμιθιάς.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 24 September 2012.

For the Council

The President

A. D. MAVROYIANNIS

---

(1)  
  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

2

---
EX-10.39



 Exhibit 10.39 

UNIVAR USA INC. 

SUPPLEMENTAL VALUED INVESTMENT PLAN 

(As Amended and Restated as of July 1, 2010) 

Second Amendment 

WHEREAS, Univar USA Inc. (“Company”) sponsors and maintains the Univar USA Inc. Supplemental Valued Investment Plan as amended and
restated as of July 1, 2010 and as thereafter amended (the “Plan”); and 
 WHEREAS, the President has the authority to amend
the Plan for changes that do not significantly increase the cost of the Plan pursuant to Section 12.1 of the Plan; and 
 WHEREAS, the
Company desires to amend the Plan to (1) change the eligibility criteria to refer to the Company’s new job classifications and require that base salary in the preceding plan year at least equal the amount set forth in Code
Section 414(q)(1)(B)(i) and (2) change the eligibility determination period to end on April 30. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan
is hereby amended effective January 1, 2011 as follows: 
 1. Section 4.1 of the Plan, Employee Eligibility, is hereby
amended in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “4.1 Employee Eligibility. An Employee shall be eligible to
become a Participant in the Plan and participate in the Plan for an upcoming Plan Year if on the date selected by the Pension Management Committee for determining eligibility for such Plan Year (see below), the Employee is eligible to participate in
the Investment Plan and meets the following criteria: 
 (i) The Employee is employed at the Company’s compensation band
l, 2 or 3; and 
 (ii) The Employee is earning a base salary at least equal to the amount set forth in Code
Section 414(q)(1)(B)(i) (as adjusted from time to time by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Code Section 414(q)(1)) which would have caused the Employee to be considered a highly compensated employee pursuant to Code
Section 414(q) for the up-coming Plan Year (e.g., $110,000 is the threshold for base salary for participation during the 2012 Plan Year because an employee had to earn at least $110,000 in total compensation in 2011 to be considered highly
compensated in 2012 for Investment Plan purposes). 
 The date as of which it is determined whether an Employee is eligible to make
Participant Deferrals and receive Matching Employer Contributions for a Plan Year shall be such date, as selected by the Pension Management Committee in its sole discretion, that occurs between April 1 and April 30 of the calendar year
immediately preceding the applicable Plan Year. The date as of which it is determined whether an Employee is eligible to receive Retirement Contributions under this Plan for a Plan Year shall be such date, as selected by the Pension Management
Committee in its sole discretion, that is on or before the date the Employee becomes eligible to receive retirement contributions to the Investment Plan pursuant to Section 3.11 therein.” 







 This Second Amendment to the Plan is adopted and executed this 2nd day of May, 2011. 

 

			
	UNIVAR USA INC.
		
	By:	 	




		 	  

		
	Its:	 	President
NOW-2014.6.30-EX10.1






EXHIBIT 10.1


SERVICENOW, INC.
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This Amendment to Employment Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made as of April 23, 2014 by and between ServiceNow, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Frank Slootman (“Executive”) and amends that certain Employment Agreement dated May 2, 2011 by and between Executive and Company (as amended through the date hereof, the “Agreement”).
In consideration of the mutual promises, agreements and provisions contained in this Amendment, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
1.    Location.  The first sentence of Section 1.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:
“1.2    Term. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall continue until May 2, 2017, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 4 herein (the “Term”).”
2.    Effectiveness.  This Amendment shall become effective as of the date first set forth above upon the execution hereof by the Company and Executive.
3.    Counterparts.  This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which, taken together, shall be deemed one and the same document.
4.    Governing Law.  The internal substantive laws, but not the choice of law rules, of California shall govern this Amendment.
5.    Effect of Amendment.  Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect.
[Signature Page Follows]



















The parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first set forth above.
SERVICENOW, INC.


	
	
	/s/ Paul Barber

	By: Paul Barber

	Its: Chairman of the Board






EXECUTIVE:
	
	
	FRANK SLOOTMAN

	/s/ Frank Slootman

	(Signature)
# L_2011260EN.01000701.xml

| 5.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 260/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 260/7

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 984/2011

of 30 September 2011

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Vinagre del Condado de Huelva (PDO)]

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 September 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 319, 24.11.2010, p. 6.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.8.   Other products of Annex I to the Treaty (spices, etc.)

SPAIN

Vinagre del Condado de Huelva (PDO)

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1075

In Re: LORENZO DOMINIC RICHARDSON, 

 Debtor. 

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

LORENZO DOMINIC RICHARDSON, 

 Plaintiff – Appellant, 

 v. 

THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE EDUCATION ASSISTANCE AUTHORITY, 

 Defendant - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, 

Chief District Judge. (5:08-cv-00557-FL) 

Submitted: May 28, 2009 Decided: June 5, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Lorenzo Dominic Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. Brent Drake 

Kiziah, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, 

Research Triangle, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Lorenzo Dominic Richardson appeals from the district 

court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders upholding 

the validity of Richardson’s debt to Appellee, and determining 

that the debt was not dischargeable in Richardson’s Chapter 7 

bankruptcy case. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Richardson v. The North Carolina State 

Education Assistance Authority, 5:08-cv-00557-FL (E.D.N.C. 

Nov. 24, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED