alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 4(g)


                                                    [BACOU USA, INC. LETTERHEAD]




October 24, 1997



Walter Stepan
215 Old River Road
Lincoln, RI 02865

Re: First Amendment to Employment Agreement

Dear Walter:

Reference is made to that certain Employment Agreement between the Corporation
and you dated January 1, 1996 (the "Employment Agreement"). Once agreed and
accepted by you in the space provided below, Section 6(b) of the Employment
Agreement shall be amended to read as follows, effective for 1997 and future
years:

     "In addition to the Base Salary, the Employee shall be entitled to receive
an annual incentive compensation payment ("Incentive Compensation") in an amount
calculated as follows:

     2.75% of Adjusted EBIT up to $10,000,000
     3.25% of Adjusted EBIT over $10,000,000, up to $20,000,000
     3.75% of Adjusted EBIT over $20,000,000, up to $30,000,000
     4.25% of Adjusted EBIT over $30,000,000

     "For purposes of this Agreement, Adjusted EBIT shall mean Bacou's earnings
before interest and taxes, as reported in its consolidated financial statements
for the calendar year for which the computation is made, increased to eliminate
the effects of the following: (i) any accrual for the Employee's Incentive
Compensation; (ii) amortization expense; and (iii) any non-recurring charges
(including but not limited to the non-recurring effects of purchase accounting
treatment of acquisitions such as inventory step-ups and purchased research and
development).

     "Incentive Compensation shall be paid by Bacou for any year by the earlier
of ninety (90) days following the last day of such year or ten (10) days after
the amount of such Incentive Compensation has been calculated."







<PAGE>   2

Walter Stepan
October 24, 1997
Page 2



All other terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain unchanged and, subject
to the amendment contained herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect.

                                        Very truly yours,

                                        /s/ Philippe Bacou
                                        -------------------------
                                        Philippe Bacou, Chairman



Agreed and Accepted:

/s/ Walter Stepan
-------------------------
Walter Stepan
BMVIT- IV/L 1 (Strategie und lnternationales) 

Postanschrift: Postfach 201, 1000 Wien 

Buroanschrift: Radetzkystraf1e 2, 1030 Wien 

E-Mail: 11 @bmvitgv.at 

Internet: www.bmvitgv.at 

(Antwort bitte unter AnfUhrung der GZ. 

an die oben angefUhrte E-Maii-Adresse) 

GZ. BMVIT-40.005/0007-IV/L 1/2014 DVR:0000175 

To 

Paul Gretch 

Director, Office of International Aviation 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7th Street, S.W. Room 6402 

Washington, DC 20590 

Paul. Gretch@dot.gov 

CC: Miriam.Zammit@vistajet.com 

Dear Mr. Gretch, 

b 

Bvndesministerivm 

fiir\lerk~hr. 

Innovation und Technologi~ 

Vienna, 25 September 2014 

With reference to the intentions of VistaJet Luftfahrtunternehmen GmbH in continuing 

nonscheduled (charter) air services to/from the United States based on fifth, sixth or seventh 

freedom traffic rights and referring to the designation of the said airline the Austria Civil Aviation 

Authority and according to the provisions of the bilateral air services agreement (Air Services 

Agreement between the Austrian Federal Government and the Government of the United States of 

America, done at Vienna on 16th of March 1989, as amended), the Austria Civil Aviation Authority 

hereby confirms that similar requests submitted by the U.S. carriers will be treated on the basis of 

reciprocity. 

Sincerely Yours, 

Silvia Gehr r 

Director, Air Transport Aiffairs 

Federal Ministry of Transport, 

Innovation and Technology 

Civil Aviation Authority
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tommy Edward YOUNG, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-7577

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 30, 2017

Decided: April 12, 2017

*182Tommy Edward Young, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Eumi Lynn Choi, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tommy Edward Young, Sr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. As the district court granted a certificate of appealability on Young’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2012), we review the district court’s legal conclusions de novo and its findings of fact derived from the evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing for clear error. *United States v. Fulks,*683 F.3d 512, 516 (4th Cir. 2012). On appeal, Young reasserts his contention that he is entitled to relief under *Missouri v. Frye,*566 U.S. 134, 144-47, 132 S.Ct. 1399, 182 L.Ed.2d 379 (2012). We have reviewed the record and Young’s assertions and find no reversible error.* Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Young,*Nos. 2:09-cr-00223-1; 2:13-cv-10108, 2016 WL 5496517 (S.D. W. Va., Sept. 29, 2016). 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.

*AFFIRMED*

*

 We note that in his informal brief, while claiming that counsel’s performance was deficient, Young failed to challenge the district court’s conclusion that Young did not demonstrate any prejudice resulting from counsel’s alleged deficiency. *See Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). As such, Young has forfeited appellate review of that aspect of his claim. *See Jackson*v. *Lightsey,*775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (recognizing that 4th Cir. R. 34(b) limits appellate review to issues raised in informal brief).
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 966

For the relief of Nathan C. Vance, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 26 (legislative day, JUNE 19), 1995

Mr. SIMPSON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Nathan C. Vance, 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. PAYMENT TO NATHAN C. VANCE.

4 (a) PAYMENT.—Subject to subsections (b) and (c),

5 the Secretary of Agriculture shall pay $4,850.00 to Na6 than C. Vance of Wyoming for fire loss arising out of the

7 Mink Area Fire in and around Yellowstone National Park

8 in 1988.

9 (b) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—The Secretary of the Treas10 ury shall pay the amount specified in subsection (a) from

11 amounts made available under section 1304 of title 31,

12 United States Code.
2

•S 966 IS

1 (c) CONDITION OF PAYMENT.—The payment made

2 pursuant to subsection (a) shall be in full satisfaction of

3 the claim of Nathan C. Vance against the United States,

4 for fire loss arising out of the Mink Area Fire, that was

5 received by the Forest Service in August 1990.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5873 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5873

                     One Hundred Fourteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
           the fourth day of January, two thousand and sixteen

                                 An Act

 
 To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 511 East San Antonio Avenue in El Paso, Texas, as the ``R.E. Thomason 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 511 
East San Antonio Avenue in El Paso, Texas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``R.E. Thomason Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``R.E. Thomason Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### Michael G. WOLFF, Trustee-Appellant, v. Garrett KATZ; Gabrielle Katz; Gregory Katz, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-1840

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 27, 2017

Decided: January 10, 2018

Jeffrey M. Orenstein, WOLFF *&*OR-ENSTEIN, LLC, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Stephen A. Metz, OFFIT KUR-MAN, P.A., Bethesda, Maryland, for Ap-pellees.

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael G. Wolff, the trustee in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding, appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing his complaint under 11 U.S.C. §§ 548, 550 (2012) as time-barred. We have reviewed the record included on appeal as well as the parties’ briefs, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Wolff v. Katz,*No. 1:16-cv-04035-JFM, 2017 WL 2590757 (D. Md. June 14, 2017). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-982]
 AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
 ACTION: Notice of application.
 SUMMARY: Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., has applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to 
                        **Supplemental Information**
                         listed below for further drug information.
 DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants therefore, may submit electronic comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before May 13, 2022. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before May 13, 2022.
 ADDRESSES: DEA requires that all comments be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, which provides the ability to type short comments directly into the comment field on the web page or attach a file for lengthier comments. Please go to 
                        *https://www.regulations.gov*
                         and follow the online instructions at that site for submitting comments. Upon submission of your comment, you will receive a Comment Tracking Number. Please be aware that submitted comments are not instantaneously available for public view on 
                        *https://www.regulations.gov.*
                         If you have received a Comment Tracking Number, your comment has been successfully submitted and there is no need to resubmit the same comment.”


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on December 10, 2021, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., 1440 Olympic Drive Athens, Georgia 30601-1645, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s): Controlled substance
Drug
                             code
ScheduleMethylphenidate
1724
IIHydromorphone
9150
IIHydrocodone
9193
IIOripavine
9330
IIThebaine
9333
IITapentadol
9780
II
 The company plans to manufacture the above-listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration. Matthew J. Strait, Deputy Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2022-05314 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 CITY OF GALLUP, New Mexico, 2 a municipal corporation , 3 Plaintiff-Appellee, 4
v. NO. A-1-CA-37247 5 PHILLIP HART , 6 Defendant-Appellant, 7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MCKINLEY COUNTY 8 Robert A. Aragon, District Judge 9 Stelzner, Winter, Warburton, Flores, Sanchez & Dawes, P.A. 10 Rebekah Anne Gallegos 11 Albuquerque, NM 12 for Appellee 13 JoHanna C. Cox 14 Albuquerque, NM 15 for Appellant 16 MEMORANDUM OPINION 17 VIGIL, Judge. 18 {1} Summary dismissal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of 192 proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary dismissal has 1 been filed and the time for doing so has expired. 2 {2} DISMISSED. 3

{3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 4

_______________________________ 5 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge 6
WE CONCUR: 7

___________________________________ 8 M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge 9

_________________________________ 10 J. MILES HANISEE, Judge 11
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 89

To amend the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

A BILL

To amend the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities

Act.

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE SCIENCE AND ENGINEER4 ING EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES ACT.

5 (a) OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS.—Section 32 of

6 the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42

7 U.S.C. 1885) is amended by adding at the end the follow8 ing new subsection:

9 ‘‘(c)(1) The Congress finds that Native Hawaiian

10 students, students who are Pacific Islanders, and Native

11 American students are underrepresented in science, com-
2

S 89 IS

1 puter science, and engineering. Such students face both

2 cultural barriers to the study of science and geographical

3 isolation.

4 ‘‘(2) The Director is authorized to make awards to

5 institutions of higher education, including community col6 leges, and local educational agencies to work in partner7 ship with community organizations to develop and imple8 ment science, computer science, technology, and mathe9 matics curricula that—

10 ‘‘(A) are in accord with the traditional cultural

11 values of the students described in paragraph (1);

12 ‘‘(B) emphasize the scientific achievements of

13 the native cultures of such students; and

14 ‘‘(C) encourage enrollment of such students in

15 higher education.’’.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTS OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wireless Xcessories Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I
Stephen Rade, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





BY  /S/ STEPHEN RADE
    ------------------------
    STEPHEN RADE
    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
    NOVEMBER 14, 2006
City Manager JOE C. THOMAS

City Attorney DAVID F. RICHARDS

Post Office Box 760 Clovis, NewMexico 88102-0760 Phone (575) 769-7828

April 4th, 2013
MrDougVoss Great Lakes Airlines CLOVIS CITYCOMMISSION Mayor DAVID M. LANSFORD MayorPro-Tern

LENVOHS Commissioners CHRIS BRYANT RANDAL S. CROWDER JUAN F. GARZA FIDEL MADRID ROBERT SANDOVAL

DAN STODDARD SANDRA TAYLOR-SAWYER

_,...,, ····i •······

DearMr. Voss; GreatLakes AirServicefrom Clovis, NM to Denver CO It is the City's desire to provide the best possible air service to the citizens ofClovis. The City, along with the Federal Aviation Administration and State ofNew Mexico has invested a significant amount of funding into this Airport. As a part of this investmentthe city is attempting to provide efficient and reliable air service to a major hub andhas selectedyourAirlineto accomplishthis. We are concerned that since establishing the route to Denver the level of service provided by Great Lakes has been less than acceptable. The citizens of this community are not able to depend on your service to be on time or to even fly on any chosenday. Since this contract began on December 1, 2012 and continuing through February 28, 2013 the scheduled flights displayedthe following deviations: TOTAL FLIGHTS SCHEDULED Departures 169 Arrivals 171 FLIGHTS CANCELLED FOROTHERTHAN WEATHER/ATC Departures 9 Arrivals 8 LATE FLIGHTS Departures Arrivals 1-5 Minutes 6+ Minutes 1-15 Minutes 46 16+ Minutes 87 6 69

....../cont

....Mr. Doug Voss Great Lakes Airlines April 4th, 2013 Page -2-

These numbers do not truly reflect the magnitude ofthe concern when considering the number of flights that are more than one hour late. As you know, service like this drives customers away and we feel that this is occurring in Clovis. The City will never be able to establish an effective and efficient service whenthe airline that serves the community cannot establish and maintain a published schedule for flights. We also have concern that the change in routing which eliminated the only New Mexico stop was not discussed withthe Cityprior to beingpublished. We feel that a change ofthis magnitude should have been explained and agreed upon prior to a final decision being made unilaterally by GreatLakes Airlines. Itis my sincere hope that Great Lakes will work expeditiously to correct the issues addressed in this letter. I would also appreciate receiving your written response outlining your proposed corrective actions. Sincerely,

DavidM. Lansford Mayor

cc: Mr. Dennis DeVaney, USDOTEAS Program
EXHIBIT 10.3
Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (File No. 333-5932), on Form S-8 (File No. 339-6172), on Form S-8 (File
No. 339-6066), on Form S-8 (File No. 335-0900) and on Form S-8 (File No.
333-68700) pertaining to the Orthofix International N.V. Staff Share Option Plan
and the Orthofix International N.V. Executive Share Option Plan of our report
dated 7 June 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and
schedules of Inter Medical Supplies Limited (which statements are not presented
separately herein) in the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December
31, 2001.


/s/ ERNST & YOUNG
21 June 2002
Ernst & Young
Nicosia, Cyprus
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains financial information extracted from Balance Sheet,
Statement of Operations, Statement of Cash Flows and Notes thereto incorporated
in Part I, Item 1. of this Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         119,175
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    141,443
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               275,618
<PP&E>                                           6,842
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 484,808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,169,072
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,482
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,124,849
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   484,808
<SALES>                                        169,472
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               169,472
<CGS>                                          182,004
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,004
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,607,106
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             578,714
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,198,352)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                               (120,729)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,319,081)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.52)


</TABLE>
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 741

To require the Army Corps of Engineers to take such actions as are necessary

to obtain and maintain a specified maximum high water level in Lake

Traverse, South Dakota and Minnesota, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 1, 1995

Mr. PRESSLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To require the Army Corps of Engineers to take such actions

as are necessary to obtain and maintain a specified maximum high water level in Lake Traverse, South Dakota

and Minnesota, 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. WATER LEVEL IN LAKE TRAVERSE, SOUTH DA4 KOTA AND MINNESOTA.

5 Notwithstanding any other law, the Secretary of the

6 Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers of the Army

7 Corps of Engineers, shall take such actions as are nec8 essary to obtain and maintain a high water level of not
2

•S 741 IS

1 more than 977 median sea level (msl) in Lake Traverse,

2 South Dakota and Minnesota.

Æ