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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2474 

To prohibit the use of funds made available under the American Rescue 

Plan Act of 2021 to purchase communications equipment or services 

that pose a national security risk. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 26, 2021 

Mr. COTTON (for himself and Mr. WARNER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of funds made available under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to purchase communications equipment or services that pose a national security 

risk. 

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 ‘‘American Tele5 communications Security Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2474 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO PURCHASE 

2 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES 

3 POSING NATIONAL SECURITY RISK. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The American Rescue Plan Act 

5 of 2021 (Public Law 117–2; 135 Stat. 4) is amended by 

6 adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘TITLE XII—NATIONAL SECU8 RITY RESTRICTIONS ON USE 

9 OF FUNDS 

10 ‘‘SEC. 12001. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO PUR11 CHASE COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR 

12 SERVICES POSING NATIONAL SECURITY RISK. 

13 ‘‘None of the funds made available under this Act or 

14 an amendment made by this Act may be used to purchase 

15 any covered communications equipment or service, as de16 fined in section 9 of the Secure and Trusted Communica17 tions Networks Act of 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1608).’’. 

18 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

19 The table of contents in section 2 of the American Rescue 

20 Plan Act of 2021 is amended by adding at the end the 

21 following: 

‘‘TITLE XII—NATIONAL SECURITY RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF 

FUNDS 

‘‘Sec. 12001. Prohibition on use of funds to purchase communications equipment or services posing national security risk.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
exv10w15








Exhibit 10.15




FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

AMGEN NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2009



The Amgen Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan as Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009
(the “Plan”) is hereby amended, effective April 11, 2011, as follows:




     The list of Employers in Appendix A is amended and restated to read as follows:


          Amgen Fremont Inc.


          Amgen Manufacturing, Limited


          Amgen Mountain View Inc.


          Amgen SF, LLC


          Amgen USA Inc.


          Amgen Worldwide Services, Inc.


          BioVex, Inc.


          Immunex Corporation


          Immunex Manufacturing Corporation


          Immunex Rhode Island Corporation


          Tularik Pharmaceutical Company


To record this First Amendment to the Plan as set forth herein, the Company has caused its
authorized officer to execute this document this 7th day of April, 2011.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	AMGEN INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Brian McNamee
 	 
	 	 	Brian McNamee 	 
	 	 	Senior Vice President, Human Resources
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                          102452
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   228671
<ALLOWANCES>                                     30965
<INVENTORY>                                     178035
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 41659
<PP&E>                                          192175
<DEPRECIATION>                                   64611
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  650219
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           288396
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                          4236
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      249465
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    650219
<SALES>                                         815711
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                815711
<CGS>                                           597955
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   749568
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1078
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4251
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  60814
<INCOME-TAX>                                     23845
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              36969
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     36969
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28
        

</TABLE>
#### McNeill vs. Ross.

*Reversal of Judgment.*

Where there is some evidence to sustain the verdict, judgment "will not he reversed on the ground that the verdict is unsupported by the evidence.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *Qla/rk*County.

Defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

The cause was submitted on the brief of *MaeBride dk Grundy*for the appellant, and on that of *O’JTeill & Sheldon*for the respondent.

LyoN, J.

The action was brought to recover a balance claimed by the plaintiff to be due him from the defendant for cutting and putting into a certain stream the pine timber theretofore standing and being upon a specified forty-acre lot. *540The price for such labor was fixed by a parol contract between the parties. The complaint alleges, and the plaintiff testified on the trial, that for 100,000 feet of the timber so cut and put into the stream, the defendant agreed to pay him $5.50 per thousand feet. The defendant answered that the contract price therefor was $2, but testified on the trial that it was $2.50 per thousand feet. Each party introduced other evidence tending more or less directly to sustain his version of the contract. This is the only controversy in the case. The plaintiff recovered; and if he stated the terms of the contract correctly, the judgment is right.

We are asked to reverse the judgment on the sole ground that “the verdict is utterly unsupported by the evidence.” From the foregoing statement of the evidence, it is' certain that the ground is untenable. The plaintiff’s testimony alone would prevent a reversal for that reason. Had his testimony been the only evidence in the case, the present judgment would have been inevitable. In a case like this we cannot disturb a judgment rendered pursuant to the verdict of a jury, even though we may think the testimony preponderates against the verdict.

*By the*Gourt.— Judgment affirmed.

RyaN, C. J., took no part.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
     the Financial Statements of Questa Oil & Gas Co. under cover of Form 10-Q
     for the nine months ended September 30, 1999 and is qualified in its
     entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         000035251
<NAME>                        Questa Oil & Gas Co.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    Sep-30-1999
<CASH>                          1598430
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   700562
<ALLOWANCES>                    10000
<INVENTORY>                     96
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                1277
<PP&E>                          15620135
<DEPRECIATION>                  6766921
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  11143579
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           1270784
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        13517
<OTHER-SE>                      0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    11143579
<SALES>                         2943704
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                3216399
<CGS>                           782484
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   2644928
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              139703
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 512428
<INCOME-TAX>                    130000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             382428
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    382428
<EPS-BASIC>                   .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .20



</TABLE>
Summary of Cash Compensation for Directors of WOR



 Exhibit 10.44 
 SUMMARY OF CASH COMPENSATION 
 FOR DIRECTORS OF 

WORTHINGTON INDUSTRIES, INC. 
 (Approved June 29, 2011 and effective September, 2011) 
 On
June 29, 2011, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) approved the following changes to the cash compensation for non-employee directors of Worthington Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), based on market information. The changes
take effect September, 2011. Non-employee directors of the Company receive the following cash compensation. Directors who are employees of the Company receive no additional compensation for serving as members of the Board or as members of Board
committees. Directors are reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with their serving as directors, including travel expenses. 
  

									
	 	  	Prior	 	  	New	 
	 Annual Retainer:
	  	$	45,000	  	  	$	55,000	  
			
	 Lead Independent Director Annual Retainer:
	  	$	25,000	  	  	$	25,000	  
			
	 Attendance at a Board Meeting (including telephonic meetings):
	  	$	1,500	  	  	$	1,500	  
			
	 Audit Committee Chair Additional Annual Retainer:
	  	$	10,000	  	  	$	15,000	  
			
	 Compensation Committee Chair Additional Annual Retainer:
	  	$	7,500	  	  	$	10,000	  
			
	 Committee Chair (other than Audit or Compensation) Additional Annual Retainer:
	  	$	7,500	  	  	$	7,500	  
			
	 Attendance at a Board Committee Meeting (including telephonic meetings):
	  	$	1,500	  	  	$	1,500
Aircraft DJI PAHNTOM 3

Weight (Battery & Propellers Included) 1280 g Max. Ascent Speed 5 m/s Max. Descent Speed 3 m/s Max. Speed 16 m/s (ATTI mode, no wind) Max. Flight Altitude 6000 m Max. Flight Time Approximately 23 minutes Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C GPS Mode GPS/GLONASS Gimbal Controllable Range Pitch: - 90° to + 30° Vision Positioning Velocity Range < 8 m/s (2 m above ground) Altitude Range 30 cm-300 cm Operating Range 30 cm-300 cm Operating Environment Brightly lit (lux > 15) patterned surfaces Camera Sensor Sony EXMOR 1/2.3” Effective pixels:12.4 M (total pixels: 12.76 M) Lens FOV 94° 20mm(35mm format equivalent ) f/2.8 ISO Range 100-3200(video) 100-1600(photo) Electronic Shutter Speed 8s -1/8000s Image Max. Size 4000 x 3000 Still Photography Modes Single shot Burst shooting: 3/5/7 frames Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB): 3/5 Bracketed frames at 0.7EV Bias Time-lapse Supported SD Card Types Micro SD Max. capacity: 64 GB. Class 10 or UHS-1 rating required Video Recording ModesUHD : 4096x2160p 24/25, 3840x2160p24/25/30 FHD:1920x1080p 24/25/30/48/50/60 HD: 1280x720p 24/25/30/48/50/60 Max. Bitrate Of Video Storage 60 Mbps Supported File Formats FAT32/exFAT Photo: JPEG, DNG Video: MP4/MOV (MPEG-4 AVC/H.264) Operating Temperature Range 0°C to 40°C © 2015 DJI. All Rights Reserved. 53 Appendix Remote Controller Operating Frequency 2.400 GHz-2.483 GHz Transmitting Distance 2000 m (Outdoor And Unobstructed) Video Output Port USB Operating Temperature Range 0°C- 40°C Battery 6000 mAh LiPo 2S Mobile Device Holder Tablets and smartphones Transmitter Power(EIRP) FCC: 20 dbm; CE:16 dbm Working Voltage 1.2 A @7.4 V Charger Voltage 17.4 V Rated Power 100 W Intelligent Flight Battery ( PH3-4480 mAh-15.2 V ) Capacity 4480 mAh Voltage 15.2 V Battery Type LiPo 4S Energy 68 Wh Net Weight 365 g Operating Temperature -10°C- 40°C Max. Charging Power 100 W
# C_2014140EN.01000501.xml

| 9.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7180 — Agrifirm/BayWa/Agrimec JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 140/04

On 5 May 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7180. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7180. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
​
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
​
​
THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), dated as of October 1, 2021 (“Effective Date”), is entered into by and between General Cannabis Corp, a Colorado corporation (the “Company”), and John Barker Dalton, an individual (“Employee”).
​
WHEREAS, the Company and Employee entered into an employment agreement as of January 24, 2020 (the “Original Agreement”);
​
WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend certain terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as set forth herein.
​
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises, terms, provisions, and conditions set forth in this Amendment, the parties hereby agree as follows:
​
		1.	Employment; Position and Duties. Effective as of the Effective Date, Employee’s employment with the Company shall continue, but with his new title as Founder, SevenFive Farms.  Employee’s employment with the Company is at will and not for any specified period and may be terminated by either Employee or the Company at any time, with or without cause.  Employee shall report directly to Jack Taylor, Senior Vice President of Operations.

​
		2.	Compensation.  Employee’s compensation shall be $50 per hour, payable monthly.  Employee shall devote up to 40 hours each month to the Company.

​
		3.	No Paid Time Off. During Employee’s employment with the Company, Employee shall not be entitled to paid vacation or paid holidays.

​
		4.	Terms of Original Agreement.  All terms and conditions set forth in the Original Agreement and not otherwise amended pursuant to this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect in accordance therewith.

​
		5.	Governing Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Colorado without giving effect to principles of conflicts or choice of laws thereof.

​
		6.	Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.

​
​

​
	​


	​



	​
	​



​



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


GENERAL CANNABIS CORP
​
By: __________________________
Adam Hershey
Interim CEO
​
​
___________________________________
John Barker Dalton

​
	​


	​



	​
	​



​
SCWC-13-0001432 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI 

MICHAEL C. GREENSPON, Petitioner/Plaintiff/Counterclaim 

Defendant-Appellant, 

v. 

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE OF RESIDENTIAL 

ASSET SECURITIZATION TRUST 2006-A8, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH 

CERTIFICATES SERIES 2006-H UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING 

AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 1, 2006, Respondent/Defendant/Counterclaim 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

and 

INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, F.S.B.; ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.; CAL-WESTERN 

RECONVEYANCE CORPORATION, Respondents/Defendants-Appellees. 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS 

(CAAP-13-0001432; CIVIL NO. 11-1-0194) 

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) 

 

 Petitioner/Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant 

Michael C. Greenspon’s Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 

October 11, 2016, is hereby rejected. 

 DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, November 22, 2016. 

 /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson 

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-13-0001432

22-NOV-2016

09:22 AM
Master Plan Amendment dated May 2, 2011 to Registrant-Sponsored Benefit Plans



 EXHIBIT 10(bb) 

MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 
 OF 
 XEROX CORPORATION SPONSORED PLANS 

WHEREAS, Xerox Corporation (the “Company”) has heretofore adopted various employee benefit plans as defined in the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (the “Plans”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plans as set forth below: 

Xerox Corporation Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Cafeteria Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Employee Stock Ownership Plan 

Xerox Corporation Extended Long-Term Disability Income Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Long-Term Care Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Long-Term Disability Income Plan 

Xerox Corporation Mid-Career Hire Executive Health Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Provisional Supplement Benefit Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Puerto Rico Insured Statutory
Short-Term Disability Income Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Retiree Flex Plan 

Xerox Corporation Retirement Income Guarantee Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Salary Redirection Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Savings Plan 

Xerox Corporation Supplemental Retirement Income Guarantee Plan for 
 Highly-Compensated Pilots 
 Xerox Corporation Tuition Aid Plan 

Xerox Corporation Unfunded Retirement Income Guarantee Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Unfunded Supplemental Executive Health Plan for Spouses 
 Xerox Corporation Vacation
Purchase Plan 
 Xerox Corporation Welfare Plan 
 Xerox Dental Care Plan 
 Xerox Medical Care Plan 

Xerox Medical Care Plan for Retired Employees (Old Plan) 
 Xerox Retiree Flex Health Care Plan 
 Xerox Retiree Health Care Plan (New Plan) 

including any other employee benefit plans, if any, for which the Vice President, Human Resources, has named a Plan Administrator committee;

 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plans are hereby amended by substituting the language below in the section of each Plan which provides a
Limitations of Actions section to read in its entirety as follows: 
 “Any action brought in state or federal court (other than an
alleged breach of fiduciary duty action which shall be governed by the terms of ERISA Section 413) must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrues. This one-year limitation period includes, but is not limited to, any
action for alleged: wrongful denial of Plan benefits, and any wrongful interference, modification, or termination of Plan benefits, rights, or features.” 







 The foregoing amendment is effective as of the date hereof. In all other respects the
Plans shall remain unchanged. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly
authorized officer this 2nd day of May, 2011. 
  

			
	XEROX CORPORATION
		
	 By
	 	/s/   TOM MADDISON
	 	 	Vice President of Human Resources
|   | (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 result of operations of the Company for the periods reflected therein. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: March 10, 2011 | /s/ Michael G. Livingston          |
|----------------------|------------------------------------|
|                 | Michael G. Livingston              |
|                 | President, Chief Executive Officer |
|                 | (Principal Executive Officer)      |
|                 |                               |
|                 | /s/ John E. Porter                 |
|                 | John E. Porter                     |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer            |
|                 | (Principal Financial Officer)      |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1807

In re: LARRY FELENTISE RAMBERT,

 Movant.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

(5:14-hc-02219-BO)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 21, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit 

Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Felentise Rambert, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Felentise Rambert petitions for a writ of mandamus, 

alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on 

various pending cases. He seeks an order from this court 

directing the district court and state court to act. We find 

the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district 

court. In addition, we do not have jurisdiction to grant 

mandamus relief against state officials. Accordingly, we grant 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the mandamus 

petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITION DENIED