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






Exhibit 10.2(c)


AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO
TO THE
TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS, INC.
2011 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN


WHEREAS, Telephone and Data Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) has adopted and maintains the Telephone and Data Systems, Inc. 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of certain employees;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) may amend the Plan as it shall deem advisable, subject to any requirement of shareholder approval, including under applicable law or the principal national stock exchange on which the Common Shares of the Company (the “Common Shares”) are then traded;
WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to broaden the circumstances under which employees of the Company who are not officers may pay for the Common Shares to be purchased pursuant to the exercise of a stock option by authorizing the Company to withhold Common Shares which would otherwise be delivered in connection with such exercise; and
WHEREAS, such amendment is not subject to any required shareholder approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that effective as of February 21, 2019, the second sentence of Section 4.1(d) of the Plan hereby is amended to read as follows:
The holder of a Stock Option may pay for the shares of Common Stock to be purchased pursuant to the exercise of such Stock Option (A) in cash, (B) by delivery (either actual delivery or by attestation procedures established by the Company) of previously-owned whole shares of Common Stock having an aggregate Fair Market Value, determined as of the date of exercise, equal to the aggregate purchase price payable by reason of such exercise, (C) by authorizing the Company to withhold whole shares of Common Stock which otherwise would be delivered having an aggregate Fair Market Value, determined as of the date of exercise, equal to the aggregate purchase price payable by reason of such exercise (in the case of such withholding in respect of a holder other than an Officer, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary within an agreement evidencing a Stock Option granted prior to February 21, 2019), (D) to the extent legally permissible, in cash by a broker-dealer acceptable to the Company to whom the holder has submitted an irrevocable notice of exercise or (E) by a combination of (A), (B) and (C).
* * * * * *


1





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Amendment Number Two as of this 21st day of February, 2019.
	
				
	 
	TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS, INC.

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	By:
	/s/ LeRoy T. Carlson, Jr.

	 
	Its:
	President and Chief Executive Officer
































































SIGNATURE PAGE TO
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO
TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS, INC.
2011 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN


2
Ray CROSBY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3015

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 20, 2018

Ray Crosby, Lake City, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See* § 934.03(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015).

ORFINGER, WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 200 9-0 819

DCN: SE020 7 7

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS I NFORMATION

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
#### FAG ITALIA S.P.A and Fag Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs, and SKF USA Inc. and SKF Industrie S.p.A., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 03-1346.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 26, 2004.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of SKF USA, Inc. et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss their appeal, 03-1346,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

> *314(1) The stay of proceedings is lifted and the motion to dismiss is granted.

> (2) All sides shall bear their own costs.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

ANDREW M. MODRO, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. Case No.: 2:18-cv-900

JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

Magistrate Judge Vascura

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

 

Defendant. 

 

ORDER

This case is before the Court to consider the Report and Recommendation issued by the

Magistrate Judge on May 6, 2019, recommending that the Court overrule Plaintiff’s Statement of

Errors and Affirm the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision. (Doc. 20). The time for

filing objections to the Report and Recommendation has passed, and no objections have been

filed to the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS AND AFFIRMS the

Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff’s Statement of Errors is hereby OVERRULED and the

decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED. 

The Clerk shall remove Document 20 from the Court’s pending motions list and enter

final judgment in this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ George C. Smith 

 GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
David Michael CAVINESS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-157

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1256 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to remove the bronze plaque and 

concrete block bearing the name of Francis Newlands from the grounds 

of the memorial fountain located at Chevy Chase Circle in the District 

of Columbia, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2021 

Ms. NORTON (for herself, Mr. RASKIN, and Ms. TITUS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to remove the bronze 

plaque and concrete block bearing the name of Francis 

Newlands from the grounds of the memorial fountain 

located at Chevy Chase Circle in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Francis G. Newlands 

5 Memorial Removal Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1256 IH

1 SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF PLAQUE AND CONCRETE FROM ME2 MORIAL FOUNTAIN GROUNDS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior 

4 shall— 

5 (1) remove the brass plaque bearing the name 

6 ‘‘Senator Francis G. Newlands’’ from the grounds of 

7 the memorial fountain; 

8 (2) remove from the south end of the memorial 

9 fountain’s face, the stone, tablet-like projection bear10 ing the name of ‘‘Francis Griffith Newlands’’ and a 

11 related inscription; 

12 (3) remove the name ‘‘Newlands Memorial 

13 Fountain’’ carved into the upper face of the memo14 rial fountain’s coping stones; and 

15 (4) offer the items removed pursuant to para16 graphs (1), (2), and (3) to the descendants of 

17 Francis Griffith Newlands for a period of 60 days, 

18 and if not claimed within that period, direct the 

19 items removed pursuant to paragraphs (1), (2), and 

20 (3) to be maintained by the National Park Service 

21 as Federal property and accessioned into the Rock 

22 Creek Park museum collection. 

23 (b) MEMORIAL FOUNTAIN.—For the purposes of this 

24 section, the term ‘‘memorial fountain’’ means the memo25 rial fountain located at Chevy Chase Circle, Connecticut 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1256 IH

1 Avenue and Western Avenue NW, in the District of Co2 lumbia. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

THEODORE CAMPBELL, JR.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 170 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 9th day of August, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                                <C>                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS                    3-MOS               
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  MAY-31-1997              MAY-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                     JUN-01-1997              JUN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       AUG-31-1997              AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                  11,009                   14,695
<SECURITIES>                                 0                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                           42,165                   24,167
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0                        0
<INVENTORY>                                  0                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        68,580                   54,455
<PP&E>                                 115,141                  114,830 
<DEPRECIATION>                          34,270                   13,138
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       4,835,683                6,265,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  680,436                1,226,395
<BONDS>                                758,750                1,470,801  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0                        0
<COMMON>                               134,796                  118,665
<OTHER-SE>                           3,471,778                3,620,510
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         4,835,683                6,265,143
<SALES>                                      0                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         3,070                   12,835
<CGS>                                        0                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          350,496                  904,387
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             0                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      12,264                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       (347,426)                (891,552) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   (347,426)                (891,552)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0                        0
<CHANGES>                                    0                        0
<NET-INCOME>                          (347,426)                (891,552)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              .03                      .08 
<EPS-DILUTED>                              .03                      .08  
        



 

                                       
<PAGE>


</TABLE>
Danny Lewis SMITH v. STATE

CR-15-1420

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
Jorge GARCES, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1718

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

NOVEMBER 07, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Amber LANE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-120

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 25, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Justin Michael DRENNAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5118

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 18, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
The GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Michelle TURCOTTE, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4678

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 27, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Donald DEARDORFF v. STATE

CR-12-1966

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
MORGAN FLORIDA PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Jim HIRCHAK, et al, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-5014

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 15, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed.
Paul G. MEAD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3317

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 31, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
J.L. NIEMAN, Appellant, v. SOUTHEASTERN GROCERS, LLC., Bi-Lo Holding, LLC., Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., and Steven C. Strachota, Appellees.

No. 1D17-4471

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Larry D. ODUM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3761

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1298 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1233 North Cedar Street in Owasso, Oklahoma, as the ‘‘Technical Sergeant Marshal Roberts Post 

Office Building’’. 

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

•HR 1298 EH

1 SECTION 1. TECHNICAL SERGEANT MARSHAL ROBERTS 

2 POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 1233 North Cedar Street in 

5 Owasso, Oklahoma, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Technical Sergeant Marshal Roberts Post Office Build7 ing’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Technical Sergeant 

12 Marshal Roberts Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 1, 

2022. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1298 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostMarshal Roberts Post Office Building’’. Owasso, Oklahoma, as the ‘‘Technical Sergeant al Service located at 1233 North Cedar Street in
**Exhibit 10.5**

**Rentrak Corporation**

**Summary of Compensation Arrangements for Non-Employee Directors**

Each non-employee director of Rentrak Corporation (“Rentrak”) who is independent (as defined in the corporate governancestandards of The Nasdaq Stock Market) is paid an annual retainer of $30,000. In addition, the chair of the Compensation Committee and the chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee each receive a $3,000 annual retainer, the chair of the AuditCommittee receives a $5,000 annual retainer, and each other independent director who serves on the Audit Committee receives a $2,500 annual retainer. Non-employee directors are also paid $1,200 for each board meeting attended in person. After anindependent director has attended four committee meetings that were not held at the same time as a board meeting, the director is paid $600 for each subsequent committee meeting attended in person or by telephone. The Chairman of the Board (who isneither an employee nor independent) receives an annual cash retainer of $50,000 in lieu of any other compensation for his services in that position. Rentrak also reimburses non-employee directors for their travel expenses for each meeting attendedin person. 

Beginning in August 2010, each independent director will be granted $100,000 of deferred stock units(“DSUs”) at or about the time of each annual meeting of shareholders under Rentrak’s Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2005 Plan”). The DSUs represent the right to receive an equal number of shares ofRentrak’s Common Stock pursuant to the terms and conditions of the 2005 Plan on a deferred basis in compliance with the terms of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended. The number of DSUs covered by each grant will bedetermined by dividing $100,000 by the stock trading price on the date of grant and rounding to the nearest whole number. 

TheDSUs will vest in equal monthly installments over the ensuing 11 calendar months, as long as the recipient continues to be a director at the end of the applicable month. Unvested DSUs will also fully vest upon termination of the recipient’sservice on the Board as a result of death, disability, after reaching age 75, or upon a change in control of Rentrak during the vesting period. Vested DSU awards become payable following the recipient’s ceasing to be a director of Rentrak.

Awards prior to 2010 generally were for 9,000 DSUs per year. The DSU awards granted in 2006 and 2007 vested on the one-yearanniversary of the grant date, while DSUs granted in 2008 and 2009 vest in three equal annual installments beginning one year after the grant date, provided that the recipient continues to be a director on the vesting date.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (section) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (section) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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.

Dated: August 13, 2009



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ GEORGE R. AYLWARD                          
|George R. Aylward                              
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
|                                               
|/s/ MICHAEL A. ANGERTHAL                       
|Michael A. Angerthal                           
|Chief Financial Officer
- 568 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

297 Nebraska Reports

COHAN v. MEDICAL IMAGING CONSULTANTS

Cite as 297 Neb. 568

Mary Cohan and Terry Cohan, individually

and as wife and husband, appellants and

cross-appellees, v. Medical Imaging

Consultants, P.C., et al., appellees

and cross-appellants.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed August 25, 2017. No. S-16-145.

supplemental opinion

Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: James T. 

Gleason, Judge. Supplemental opinion: Former opinion modified. Motions for rehearing overruled.

Richard J. Rensch and Sean P. Rensch, of Rensch & Rensch 

Law, P.C., L.L.O., for appellants.

David D. Ernst and Kellie Chesire Olson, of Pansing, Hogan, 

Ernst & Bachman, L.L.P., for appellees Medical Imaging 

Consultants, P.C., and Robert M. Faulk, M.D.

William R. Settles and Kate Geyer Johnson, of Lamson, 

Dugan & Murray, L.L.P., for appellees Bellevue Obstetrics and 

Gynecology Associates, P.C., et al.

Heavican, C.J., Wright, Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, and

Kelch, JJ.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

11/17/2017 09:16 AM CST
- 569 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

297 Nebraska Reports

COHAN v. MEDICAL IMAGING CONSULTANTS

Cite as 297 Neb. 568

Per Curiam.

We consider the appellees’ motions for rehearing concerning our opinion in Cohan v. Medical Imaging Consultants.

1

We overrule the motions, but we modify the original opinion 

as follows:

In the section of the opinion designated “3. Cross-Appeals

by Appellees,” we add a sentence at the end of the first 

paragraph,2 such that the paragraph reads as follows:

Appellees’ cross-appeals assign as error the admission 

of Dr. Naughton’s testimony. Appellees moved to strike 

Dr. Naughton’s testimony because they claimed that only 

Mary’s prognosis at the time of trial was relevant and that 

Nebraska did not recognize a theory of recovery based 

upon loss of chance. The district court, in overruling 

the motions to strike, found that Dr. Naughton’s opinion 

was relevant for the limited purpose of establishing that 

early discovery of cancer leads to a better prognosis. We 

understand the district court to have used “prognosis” to 

refer to the risk of recurrence and the probability of an 

improved outcome.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

 Former opinion modified.

 Motions for rehearing overruled.

Funke, J., not participating.

1 Cohan v. Medical Imaging Consultants, ante p. 111, ___ N.W.2d ___ 

(2017).

2 Id. at 129-130, ___ N.W.2d at ___.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.01


                              OCULAR SCIENCES, INC.

   STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE (BASIC AND DILUTED)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  Three Months Ended
                                                                       March 31,
                                                                1998               1997
                                                            -----------        -----------
<S>                                                         <C>                <C>        
Net income per share (basic):

    Net income                                              $ 5,844,000        $ 1,802,000
                                                            ===========        ===========

    Weighted average common shares outstanding               21,919,973         16,558,210
                                                            ===========        ===========

    Net income per share (basic)                            $      0.27        $      0.11
                                                            ===========        ===========

Net income per share (diluted):

    Net income (diluted)                                    $ 5,844,000        $ 1,822,000
                                                            ===========        ===========

    Weighted average common shares outstanding               21,919,973         16,558,210

    Weighted average shares of stock options
        under the treasury stock method                       1,268,723          2,779,392

    Weighted average shares issuable upon conversion
        of the Series A Preferred Stock                               0            236,336
                                                            -----------        -----------

    Weighted average common and dilutive
        potential common shares outstanding                  23,188,696         19,573,938
                                                            ===========        ===========

    Net income per share (diluted)                          $      0.25        $      0.09
                                                            ===========        ===========
</TABLE>



                                       27
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 2 of 9 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 3 of 9 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 4 of 9 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 5 of 9 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 6 of 9 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 7 of 9 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 8 of 9 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 3:18-mj-00400-SLO Doc #: 1 Filed: 05/29/18 Page: 9 of 9 PAGEID #: 9
Ronald C. MEIXNER, Appellant, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1023

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.