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

                                                                    Exhibit 10.2

[Letterhead of The Smith & Wollensky Restaurant Group, Inc.]

April 27, 2001

Mr. Jim Nicholson
Holrod Associates, LP
645 Madison Avenue
Room 501
New York, NY 10022

Re: Manhattan Ocean Club
    --------------------


Dear Mr. Nicholson:

On March 23, 2001 The Smith & Wollensky Restaurant Group, Inc. filed an S-1
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in preparation for an Initial
Public Offering planned for May. As part of our preparation for this exciting
step our attorneys have asked us to make certain modifications in existing
agreements under which we operate.

In the case of our Lease Agreement, dated August 31, 1983, we need your
assistance in making several corrections and changes. Since the agreement was
signed we have had name changes and changes in legal entities. I am proposing
we agree that any reference to either Thursday's Supper Pub, Inc. or
Manhattan Ocean Club Associates now be considered to apply to the Manhattan
Ocean Club, L.L.C., and any reference to Thursday's Supper Pub, Inc., a New
York limited partnership, be replaced with the reference Manhattan Ocean
Club, L.L.C., a New York Limited Liability Company, effective with our
reorganization January 12, 1996.

Further, in order to facilitate any future changes with the structure of our
Company, I propose that Article 11 of the agreement be changed to allow us to
assign the lease to The Smith & Wollensky Restaurant Group, Inc. or one of
our subsidiaries, without requiring us to obtain permission and that Article
49, Subparagraph (d), of the agreement be changed by stating that an
assignment to The Smith & Wollensky Restaurant Group, Inc. or one of its
subsidiaries is not considered an "assignment" for the purposes of the
agreement.

<PAGE>

Holrod Associates, L.P.
April 27, 2001
Page 2

In my judgment, none of these items has had or will have any effect on the
quality of our relationship, or our desire to continue our successful
association. However, I would be most appreciative if you would acknowledge
your acceptance of these changes, which will be deemed effective as of the
date of this letter, by countersigning this letter with me.

Sincerely,

/s/ Alan M. Mandel
Alan M. Mandel
Chief Financial Officer



THE SMITH & WOLLENSKY                   HOLROD ASSOCIATES, LLC
RESTAURANT GROUP, INC.

By:  /s/ Alan M. Mandel                 By:  /s/ James O. Nicholson
    ----------------------------------      ----------------------------------
    Name: Alan M. Mandel                    Name: James O. Nicholson
    Title: Chief Financial Officer          Title: Manager
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01788]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 9020]


Overseas Security Advisory Council Meeting Notice

Closed Meeting

    The Department of State announces a meeting of the U.S. State 
Department--Overseas Security Advisory Council on February 24 and 25, 
2015. Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(5 U.S.C. Appendix), and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), and 5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(7)(E), it has been determined that the meeting will be closed 
to the public. The meeting will focus on an examination of corporate 
security policies and procedures and will involve extensive discussion 
of trade secrets and proprietary commercial information that is 
privileged and confidential, and will discuss law enforcement 
investigative techniques and procedures. The agenda will include 
updated committee reports, a global threat overview, and other matters 
relating to private sector security policies and protective programs 
and the protection of U.S. business information overseas.
    For more information, contact Marsha Thurman, Overseas Security 
Advisory Council, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-2008, 
phone: 571-345-2214.

    Dated: January 16, 2015.
Bill A. Miller,
Director of the Diplomatic, Security Service, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015-01788 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-43-P
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01991]



[[Page 5507]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-04-2015]


Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 26--Atlanta, Georgia; Notification of 
Proposed Production Activity; Mizuno USA, Inc (Golf Clubs); Braselton, 
Georgia

    Georgia Foreign-Trade Zone, Inc., grantee of FTZ 26, submitted a 
notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf 
of Mizuno USA, Inc. (Mizuno), located in Braselton, Georgia. The 
notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the 
FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on January 15, 2015.
    The Mizuno facility is located within Site 31 of FTZ 26. The 
facility is used for golf club assembly. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), 
FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status materials 
and components and specific finished products described in the 
submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized 
by the FTZ Board.
    Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Mizuno from customs 
duty payments on the foreign status components used in export 
production. On its domestic sales, Mizuno would be able to choose the 
duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to golf clubs 
(duty rate--4.4%) for the following foreign status inputs: golf club 
heads, shafts and grips (duty rate--4.9%). Customs duties also could 
possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign status production equipment.
    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions 
shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the 
address below. The closing period for their receipt is March 16, 2015.
    A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection 
at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, 
Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the ``Reading Room'' section of the 
FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.
    For further information, contact Diane Finver at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5e1a373f303b70183730283b2c1e2a2c3f3a3b70393128"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="783c1119161d563e11160e1d0a380c0a191c1d561f170e">[email protected]</span></a> or (202) 482-1367.

    Dated: January 27, 2015.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01991 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1858 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 4514 Williamson Trail in Liberty, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Ryan Scott Ostrom Post 

Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1858 EH

1 SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT RYAN SCOTT OSTROM POST 

2 OFFICE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 4514 Williamson Trail in Lib5 erty, Pennsylvania, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Staff Sergeant Ryan Scott Ostrom Post Office’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Ryan 

11 Scott Ostrom Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 10, 

2017. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1858 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostRyan Scott Ostrom Post Office’’. Liberty, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant al Service located at 4514 Williamson Trail in
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO S

. 02 - 14 - 00176 - CR 02 - 14 - 00177 - CR QUINN FORD, JR. APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

------------ FROM THE 297TH DISTR ICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 1267457D, 12 67459D

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

### CORRECTED ORDER

------------ We have considered the court reporter’s request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record in this appeal. The request is GRANTED . The reporter’s record is ORDERED due for filing in this cour t no later than Wednesday, October 22, 2014

. **NO FURTHER REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME SHOULD BE NECESSARY** 

. The clerk of this court is directed to transmit a copy of the order to the attorneys of record, the trial court judge, and the court reporter.
DATED September 30, 2014

. PER CURIAM
Ptittcb ^tatcB ^ttmit 

WASHINGTON. DC 20510-0906 

BFLL NELSON 

FLORFDA 

August 20, 2010 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast 

Washington, District of Columbia 20590 

CT-t 

c n i 

CZ5 

n 

• • — ^ 

ro 

> 

_o 

CD 

^ ^ .00 

-. .i —: 

r " j "'.<*: •—-• 

•"-^^Si 

m-^ —•*! """ i •m J ' 

S 5 ^ o Q ^ 

" » • ^fi . 

cTS 

RE: Small Community Air Service Development (SCASD): The Northwest Florida 

Regional Airport 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

I am pleased to provide this letter in support of the Northwest Florida Regional Airport 

(VPS)'s efforts to obtain a federal grant. The goal of their proposed project is to recruit 

additional air carrier services and to diversify public transportation options. 1 respectfully request 

your consideration of this organization's application for federal funding. 

Quality transportation programs focusing on developing new markets for communities 

aJong the Gulf Coast are important to me as a U.S. Senator. If funded, this project will benefit 

over two million people in the area who have limited access to low-cost carrier airlines. 

Again, 1 encourage your consideration of this worthy cause. If I can be of further 

assistance in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at the address below. 

BN/ut 

CC: Ms. Lynn Bannister, Regional Director, U. S. Senator Bill Nelson 

United States Senator Bill Nelson, Landmark Two, 225 East Robinson Street, Suite 410, Orlando, Florida 32801 

Telephone: (407) 872-7161 • Toll-Free in iv/orido O/i/y (888) 671-4091 • Fax:(407)872-7165 

http://bllinelson.senate.gov
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certifications
      Pursuant to**


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


**(18
      U.S.C. Section 1350)**





In
      connection with the Annual Report (the “report”) of Stock-Trak Group, Inc.
      (formerly Neutron Enterprises, Inc.) (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year
      ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
      Rory Olson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Mitchell Rosen, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his
      knowledge:





(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/
                Rory OlsonRory
                OlsonChief
                Executive Officer/s/
                Mitchell RosenMitchell
                RosenChief
                Financial Officer




Date:
      March 28, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-30134

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JOHNNIE RAY CARPENTER,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 09-CR-00271

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After consenting to a jury trial before a magistrate judge, Johnnie Ray

Carpenter was convicted for obstructing a deputy United States marshal, and

other duly authorized persons, in serving or attempting to serve and execute a

legal and judicial writ and process of a court of the United States, in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 1501. He appealed to the district court, which affirmed. United

States v. Carpenter, No. 09-CR-00271, 2012 WL 292480 (W.D. La. 31 Jan. 2012). 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 12, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-30134 Document: 00512081583 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/12/2012
No. 12-30134

At the time of the offense, Carpenter was police chief of Winnfield,

Louisiana. He presents three claims: (1) the evidence was not sufficient to

support his conviction for knowingly and willfully obstructing a federal officer

in executing an arrest warrant; (2) Carpenter’s actions in his official capacity as

police chief were justified; and (3) the district court erred in allowing testimonial

evidence of Carpenter’s criminal history. Essentially for the reasons stated in

the district court’s well-reasoned and comprehensive opinion, the judgment is

AFFIRMED. 

2

 Case: 12-30134 Document: 00512081583 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/12/2012
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Larry Lattimore, Appellant.

[772 NYS2d 537]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), rendered June 2, 1999, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in permitting testimony concerning a prior uncharged crime is without merit *(see People v Corella,*281 AD2d 428 [2001]; *People*
      *400
      *v Wheeler,*257 AD2d 673 [1999]). Since the defendant claimed that he acted in self-defense, the issue of his motive and intent was significant. The proffered evidence “was highly probative in showing that the stabbing was intentional” *(People v Corella, supra*at 429; *see People v Hawker,*215 AD2d 499 [1995]). Further, any prejudice was minimized by the trial court’s limiting instructions to the jury *(People v Carver,*183 AD2d 907, 908 [1992]; *see People v Lunsford,*244 AD2d 507 [1997]).

The defendant was not deprived of his right to counsel at the sentencing proceeding. A defendant’s right to counsel is adversely affected when defense counsel “either voluntarily or at the court’s urging” acts as a witness against the defendant *(People v Santana,*156 AD2d 736, 737 [1989]; *see People v Shadney,*81 AD2d 842 [1981]). However, in the instant case, the trial court considered the defendant’s pro se motion pursuant to CPL 330.30 to set aside the verdict on various grounds, including that he had been denied effective assistance of counsel, before defense counsel made any statements, and stated on the record that it did not “see any grounds to set aside this verdict.” The defense counsel’s subsequent statements related to matters that were evident from the record before the trial court and could not have affected the trial court’s determination denying the defendant’s pro se motion. Accordingly, it was not necessary to assign the defendant new counsel *(see People v Braelfort,*256 AD2d 351, 352 [1998]; *People v Maragh,*208 AD2d 563 [1994]; *People v Rodriguez,*189 AD2d 684 [1993]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention raised in his supplemental pro se brief, he received effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Henry,*95 NY2d 563 [2000]; *People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708 [1998]; *People v Groonell,*256 AD2d 356, 357 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit. Smith, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.
# L_2015193EN.01013301.xml

| 21.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 193/133 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 193/133

---

DECISION (EU) 2015/1195 OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 2 July 2015

amending Decision (EU) 2015/298 on the interim distribution of the income of the European Central Bank (ECB/2015/25)

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 33 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Decision (EU) 2015/774 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2015/10) (1) establishes a secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme (hereinafter the ‘PSPP’). Provision needs to be made for the interim distribution of the ECB's income from the PSPP in Decision (EU) 2015/298 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/57) (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Decision (EU) 2015/774 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2015/10) (1) establishes a secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme (hereinafter the ‘PSPP’). Provision needs to be made for the interim distribution of the ECB's income from the PSPP in Decision (EU) 2015/298 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/57) (2).

| (2) | Therefore, Decision (EU) 2015/298 (ECB/2014/57) should be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Therefore, Decision (EU) 2015/298 (ECB/2014/57) should be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Amendment

Point (d) of Article 1 of Decision (EU) 2015/298 (ECB/2014/57) is replaced by the following:

| ‘(d) | “ECB's income arising from securities” means the net income arising from purchases by the ECB of securities: (i) under the SMP in accordance with Decision ECB/2010/5; (ii) under the CBPP3 in accordance with Decision ECB/2014/40; (iii) under the ABSPP in accordance with Decision ECB/2014/45; and (iv) under the secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme (PSPP) in accordance with Decision (EU) 2015/774 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2015/10) (*1). |
| --- | --- |

‘(d)

Article 2

Entry into force

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

Official Journal of the European Union

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 2 July 2015.

The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI

---

(1)  Decision (EU) 2015/774 of the European Central Bank of 4 March 2015 on a secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme (ECB/2015/10) (OJ L 121, 14.5.2015, p. 20).

1

(2)  Decision (EU) 2015/298 of the European Central Bank of 15 December 2014 on the interim distribution of the income of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/57) (OJ L 53, 25.2.2015, p. 24).

2

---
#### Robert Andrew BOWERS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 21744.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

April 19, 1965.

Joseph H. Davis, Macon, Ga., for appellant.

Gary B. Blasingame, Asst. U. S. Atty., Floyd M. Buford, U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for appellee.

*125Before WISDOM and GEWIN, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The appellant was convicted of robbery of a bank which had its deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. He attacks his conviction on the ground that the evidence raised a reasonable doubt as to his sanity as a matter of law. A question of this kind must be determined upon the peculiar facts of each individual case. We have examined the record carefully in the light of appellant’s contention, and have come to the conclusion that when the whole evidence is considered, regardless of the source from which it came, this case is one that was properly submitted to the jury for their determination of the credibility and weight of the testimony on the question of the appellant’s sanity.

The charge to the jury was more favorable to the defendant than was required under Carter v. United States, 5 Cir., 1963, 325 F.2d 697, and presents no reversible error.

The judgment is affirmed.
CLYDE BAILEY P.C.
                            Certified Public Accountant
                               10924 Vance Jackson #404
                               San Antonio, Texas 78230
                                   (210) 699-1287 (ofc)
                 (888) 699-1287 -- (210) 691-2911 (fax)





January 10, 2003





Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.  20549




RE:  HerbalOrganics.com
     Registration Statement on Form 10-KSB


I consent to the use of my report, dated January 10, 2003, in the
Company's Form 10-KSB annual report filing with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

Sincerely,



Clyde Bailey, CPA
Exhibit 10.1 (W0276510).DOC








Exhibit 10.1




Wausau Paper Corp.

2011 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan







A portion of each individual officer’s grant, referred to below as the “Retention Award,” will vest upon meeting certain criteria relating to continued employment with the Company.  The remaining portion of the grant, referred to below as the “Performance Incentive,” will vest upon meeting both performance and continued employment criteria.  The maximum potential award for the CEO, chief financial officer, and each of the other executive officers with segment operating responsibility is described in the “Total Opportunity” column below.




							
	 
	Performance Units Granted


	 
	Retention

Award*

	Maximum

Performance Incentive**

	Total

Opportunity


	 
	 
	 
	 

	CEO

	23,996

	 
	215,960

	 
	239,956

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Executive Vice President, Finance

	9,152

	 
	59,487

	 
	68,639

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Senior Vice President, Towel & Tissue

	6,261

	 
	48,002

	 
	55,263

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Senior Vice President, Paper

	6,378

	 
	48,901

	 
	54,279

	 






   *The Retention Award is a grant of performance units equal to a specified percentage of base salary, which vests and is converted to a right to receive common stock (or, in the Compensation Committee’s discretion, cash with an equivalent value) based on continuous employment with the Company (in the same position or in a position with greater authority) through January 3, 2013.

**The Performance Incentive is a grant of performance units equal to a specified percentage of base salary.  These performance units may vest and be converted to a right to receive common stock (or, in the Compensation Committee’s discretion, cash with an equivalent value) based on (1) continuous employment with the Company (in the same position or in a position with greater authority) through January 3, 2013; and (2) the Company’s achieving levels of Return on Capital Employed (“ROCE”) ranging from 5% ROCE to 14% ROCE.  For purposes of this plan, ROCE is determined by excluding base gains from timberland sales and adjusting for other extraordinary items (which may include, for example, facility closure charges, one-time expenses associated with certain major capital projects, black liquor tax credit impacts, or other similar items).  ROCE is calculated after incentive compensation expenses have been included.  No shares of common stock or cash will be awarded if earnings are at the bottom of the targeted range of ROCE, and the number of shares of common stock or cash awarded will increase on a pro rata basis to the maximum potential award if ROCE is at the top of the targeted range.