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


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.4


                 FIRST AMENDMENT TO CHANGE OF CONTROL AGREEMENT

WHEREAS, MiniMed Inc. (the "Company") and David Morley (the "Executive") have
entered into that certain Change of Control Agreement dated March 1, 1999 (the
"Agreement"); and

WHEREAS, the Agreement expires pursuant to its terms on March 1, 2001; and

WHEREAS, the Company considers it essential and in the best interest of its
stockholders to continue to foster the continuous employment of key management
personnel and to continue to reinforce and encourage the continued attention and
dedication of the Executive to his assigned duties without distraction in the
face of potentially disturbing circumstances arising from the possibility of a
change in control of the Company;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Executive agree as follows:


1.   The preamble to Section 1 of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety
     and replaced with the following:

     "1.  Payment of Severance Benefits Upon Change of Control. In the event of
          a Change of Control of the Company (as defined in Section 3) during
          the two-year period starting March 1, 2001, the Executive shall be
          entitled to the benefits set forth in Section 2 (the "Severance
          Benefits"), but only if:"

2.   All other terms and conditions in the Agreement, including but not limited
     to the remaining provisions of Section 1, shall remain unchanged and in
     full force and effect.

3.   This Amendment shall be effective as of March 1, 2001.

4.   This Amendment may be executed in two counterparts each of which shall be
     deemed an original but both of which together shall constitute one and the
     same instrument.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, both the Executive and the Company have caused this
amendment to be executed by himself or by its duly authorized representatives,
respectively:

         MINIMED INC.

     By: /s/ Terrance H. Gregg             By: /s/ David Morely
         ---------------------                 --------------------
                                               David Morley

     Its: President & COO
          --------------------
**EXHIBIT 15**

 

The PartnersDuke Realty Limited Partnership

 

 

Gentlemen:

 

RE:  Registration Statement No.333-108557-01

 

With respect to the subject registration statement, we acknowledge ourawareness of the use therein of our report dated October 29, 2003 relatedto our review of interim financial information.

 

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such reportis not considered a part of a registration statement prepared or certified byan accountant, or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within themeaning of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

 

 
| KPMG LLP  Indianapolis, Indiana  November 12, 2003 |
|---------------------------------------------------------|

 

----
HomeRadioactive WasteLow-Level Waste Disposal

# Low-Level Waste Disposal Licensing

Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, NRC can relinquish authority for regulation of radioactive materials to the States upon request by them and a demonstration that the State has a regulatory program that is adequate and compatible with NRC's. NRC exercised this option for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. NRC Agreement States license all operating low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities in the United States, currently three facilities. Licensees may apply to an Agreement State for periodic renewal of a license.

For additional information on Licensed facilities, see the following:
        - Locations
        - Disposal Statistics
        - Compacts

## Roles of the NRC and Agreement States

In order for an Agreement State to license a low-level waste disposal facility, the State regulations for low-level waste disposal must be compatible with NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 61. NRC also conducts periodic reviews of Agreement State programs, as part of NRC's Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program, to determine if they continue to be adequate and compatible with NRC's. If requested, NRC provides assistance to the Agreement States on low-level radioactive waste disposal issues.

If NRC were to receive a license application from a non-Agreement State for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility, NRC would review the application in accordance with the procedural and technical requirements in 10 CFR Part 61.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, June 8, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Low-Level Waste Disposal Regulations, Guidance, and Communications
          - Licensing
          - Oversight
          - Decision Support
          - Public Outreach
          - Low-Level Waste Disposal Under 10 CFR 20.2002
          - 10 CFR 20.2002 Process for Alternative Disposals
          - Very Low Level Waste
          - Transfer of Very Low-Level Waste to Exempt Persons for Disposal

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, June 8, 2020
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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Indian Affairs

          - [DR.5B711.IA000815]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of approved Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compact.

# SUMMARY:

This notice publishes the approval of the compact between the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the State of South Dakota governing Class III gaming (Compact).

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         February 3, 2015.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary—Policy and Economic Development, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Under section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2701*et seq.,*                     the Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the                     **Federal Register**                     notice of approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. As required by 25 CFR § 293.4, all compacts are subject to review and approval by the Secretary. The Compact expands the type of gaming permitted, increases the number of gaming devices, and raises the limits on wagers. The term of the Compact is 10 years, and may be extended for additional 10-year periods.                

Dated: January 22, 2015.

Kevin K. Washburn,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2015-01982 Filed 2-2-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-4N-P
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-13-00305-CR

PANFILO JOSE PEREZ

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 13-2-27185-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 23, 2014
#### Hautenen (Larry), Appellant, vs. Dewey and others, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Kadvdt & Lepp*of Kenosha.

For the respondents: Randall, *Cavanagh, Stephenson & Mittelstaed*of Kenosha.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit32.1**

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

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Duke Realty Limited Partnership (the “Partnership”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dennis D. Oklak,Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1)         The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)          The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Partnership.

|        | /s/   Dennis D. Oklak      |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|        | Dennis D. Oklak                      |   |
|   | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   | of the General Partner               |   |
|   | Date: August 14, 2006           |   |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to Duke Realty Limited Partnership, and will be retainedby Duke Realty Limited Partnership and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
1 

### Ogulei, David

From: **Garnett, Kim** Sent: **Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:27 AM** To: **Ogulei, David** Subject: **FW: QAG PS11** Attachments: **DRAFT Appendix A -Application of PS-11B_011013.pdf; DRAFT PM CEMS-QAG Model for**  **EPRI_Communication_copy for review - 011012.docx**

From: John Cooper [mailto:jacooper@cooperenvironmental.c om] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 11:02 AM To: Garnett, Kim; Bivins, Dan Cc: troyp@cooperenvironmental.com Subject: QAG PS11

Hi Kim/Dan, Attached is the DRAFT PM CEMS QAG model paper I men tioned the other day. I would be very interested i n discussing this in more detail. Call if you have questions or perhaps we can discuss it the next time I am in RT P. I will also follow this email up with Troy’s and my SES presentations from last year. John

John A. Cooper, Ph. D. President Cooper Environmental Services LLC 10180 SW Nimbus Ave. Suite J6 Portland, OR 97223
# Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website. 

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) (3/17) Standard Document(53.75 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) Overview(342.81 KB)

Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) CPPE(25.14 KB)

Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities (Ac.) (643) Network Diagram(49.23 KB)

## Conservation at Work: Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities

This video explores how Dale Parsons implemented this conservation practice on his operation in Tuckerton, New Jersey.

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of Precision Drilling Corporation on Form 40-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Precision Drilling Corporation, hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, 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 Precision Drilling Corporation. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Dated: March 16, 2018

 

| By:    |   | /s/ Carey T. Ford                                                                                |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Carey T. Ford, Senior Vice President and Chief

Financial Officer Precision Drilling Corporation |
5 7 1

1

2

4

6 7

8 9

1214

15

13

6

4

2

16

5

10

8

3

Columbia

Trojan

Humboldt Bay

Rancho Seco

Diablo Canyon

San Onofre

Palo Verde

DOE TMI-2 Storage

DOE Idaho Spent Fuel Facility

Private Fuel Storage

Ft Saint Vrain

Ft Calhoun

Cooper

Wolf Creek Callaway

Monticello Big Rock Pt

Nine Mile Pt

Fitzpatrick

North Anna

Surry

McGuire Shearon Harris

Catawba

OconeeSummer

Watts Bar

Sequoyah

Browns Ferry

Grand Gulf

River Bend

Waterford

Arkansas

Nuclear One

Comanche 

Peak

South Texas Project

Robinson

Brunswick

Vogtle

Hatch

Farley

Crystal River St Lucie

Turkey Point

Ginna

Kewaunee

Point Beach

Palisades

Cook Zion FermiPerry

Davis 

Besse

Beaver 

Valley

Prairie Island

LaCrosse

 56 Reactor sites operating general licensed ISFSIs

9 Reactor sites pursuing a general licensed ISFSI

 15 Specific licensed ISFSIs (at or away from reactor sites)

 (No known sites are pursuing a future specific licensed ISFSI)

 3 Reactor sites have not announced intentions regarding ISFSI

 34 States have at least one ISFSI

Northeast:

 1 Maine Yankee

 2 Seabrook

 3 Vermont Yankee

 4 Yankee Rowe

 5 Pilgrim

 6 Haddam Neck

 7 Millstone

 8 Indian Point

 9 Susquehanna

 10 Three Mile Island

 11 Limerick

 12 Peach Bottom

 13 Oyster Creek

 14 Hope Creek

 15 Salem

 16 Calvert Cliffs

Midwest:

 1 Dresden

 2 GE Morris (wet)

 3 Braidwood

 4 LaSalle

 5 Byron

 6 Duane Arnold

 7 Quad Cities

 8 Clinton

U.S. Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations

3

11
Exhibit
3.4




CERTIFICATE





The undersigned does hereby certify
that he is the Chief Executive Officer of TIB Financial Corp. (the
“Corporation”), and that the following resolution was duly adopted by the Board
of Directors at a meeting held on March _____, 2008:





AMENDMENT
TO BYLAWS





BE IT RESOLVED, that Article II,
Section 4 of the Bylaws relating to “Classification of Board and Term” is hereby
amended by deleting such text in its entirety and inserting the following in
lieu thereof:





The number of Directors shall be the
number from time to time fixed by the shareholders or by the Directors, in
accordance with the provisions of the Bylaws of the Corporation, but at no time
shall the number of directors be fewer than five (5).  The Board of
Directors of the Corporation shall be divided into two classes as equal in
number as may be feasible, with the term of office of one class expiring each
year.  At each annual meeting of shareholders, successors to the
directors whose terms shall then expire shall be elected to hold office for the
terms expiring at the second succeeding annual meeting.  Directors
shall continue in office until the end of their respective term and until his or
her successor is elected and qualified or until there is a decrease in the
number of directors.  In the case of any vacancies, by reason of an
increase in the number of directors or otherwise, it shall be filled by the
affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors, though less than a
quorum of the Board of Directors, and each additional director shall hold office
until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until his successor shall have
been elected and qualified.  When the number of directors has changed,
any newly created directorships or any decrease in directorships shall be so
assigned among the classes by a majority of the directors then in office, no
less than a quorum, as to make all classes as equal in number as may be
feasible.  No decrease in the number of directors shall shorten the
term of an incumbent director.





I further certify that the foregoing
resolution is in full force and effect and has not been amended or rescinded as
of the date hereof.





In Witness Whereof, I have signed this
Certificate for and on behalf of the Corporation this _____ day of March,
2008.





/s/ Edward
      V. LettEdward
      V. LettPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
# C_2004118EN.01003001.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/30

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE

(Fourth Chamber)

of 1 April 2004

in Case C-184/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien): Helmut Fröschl v Republik Österreich (1)

1

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Proof of competence required in order to exercise a profession - Equivalent - Conditions - Professional experience acquired in another Member State - Principle of non-discrimination - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services)

(2004/C 118/54)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-184/03: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien (Austria), seeking to obtain, in the proceedings pending before that court between Helmut Fröschl and Republik Österreich, a preliminary ruling relating to the interpretation of Articles 12 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC – the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber; F. Macken and K. Lenaerts, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order on 1 April 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

Articles 12 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which, in a situation like that at issue in the main proceedings, professional experience is not recognised as equivalent to possession of the proof of competence required in order to work as a self-employed photographer, on the sole ground that that experience was acquired in the Member State of establishment and not in another Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 47 of 21. 2. 2004.

1

---
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffPerformance and Accountability Report (NUREG-1542)

# Performance and Accountability Report - Fiscal Year 2012 (NUREG-1542, Volume 18 and Supplement 1)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1542, Volume 18 (PDF - 29.85 MB)
        - NUREG-1542, Volume 18, Supplement 1 (PDF - 2.32 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published**: November 2012

Division of Planning and Budget Office of the Chief Financial Officer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The Fiscal Year 2012 Performance and Accountability Report provides performance results and audited financial statements that enable the President, Congress, and the public to assess the performance of the agency in achieving its mission and stewardship of its resources. The report contains a concise overview, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, as well as performance and financial sections. Details of performance results and program evaluations can be found in the Other Accompanying Information section.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 5, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-22-00346-CV

IN RE KANDIS N. HUTCHINSON, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 301st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-02821

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Goldstein

Opinion by Justice Nowell

Before the Court are relator’s April 18, 2022 petition for writ of injunction 

and real parties in interest’s motion to dismiss. In the petition, relator seeks a writ of 

injunction pending resolution of her separate appeal from the family court associate 

judge’s report denying her request for a temporary injunction.

A court of appeals may grant injunctive relief to protect its jurisdiction over a 

pending appeal and preserve the subject matter of the litigation so that the appeal 

does not become moot. See Dallas Morning News v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 842 

S.W.2d 655, 657 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); see also TEX. GOV’T CODE

§ 22.221(a) (“Each court of appeals or a justice of a court of appeals may issue a 

writ of mandamus and all other writs necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of the 
–2–

court.”). This Court, however, has now issued an opinion and judgment in the appeal. 

Hutchinson v. B&K Hutchinson LLC, No. 05-22-00343-CV, 2022 WL 1401427 

(Tex. App.—Dallas May 4, 2022, no pet. h.) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we grant real 

parties’ motion and dismiss the petition for writ of injunction as moot. We also lift

the stay issued by our April 19, 2022 order granting relator’s request for immediate 

relief.

220346f.p05 /Erin A. Nowell/ 

ERIN A. NOWELL

JUSTICE