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



Exhibit 10.7(a)



PLEXUS CORP.
ANNUAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEE COMPENSATION
Effective November 15, 2017


____________________________________________________________________________
BOARD MEMBERS AND BOARD LEADERSHIP
____________________________________________________________________________


	
			
	Chairman Retainer
	$240,000.00
	USD

	Board Member Retainer (all directors)
	$65,000.00
	USD

	Lead Director Retainer 
	$40,000.00
	USD






____________________________________________________________________________


COMMITTEE MEMBERS


AUDIT COMMITTEE


COMPENSATION & LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (“COMPENSATION COMMITTEE”)


NOMINATING & CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE (“NOMINATING COMMITTEE”)
____________________________________________________________________________


	
			
	Compensation Committee Chairperson Retainer
	$21,500.00
	USD

	Compensation Committee Member Retainer
	$10,000.00
	USD

	Nominating Committee Chairperson Retainer 
	$17,250.00
	USD

	Nominating Committee Member Retainer 
	$6,250.00
	USD

	Audit Committee Chairperson Retainer 
	$27,000.00
	USD

	Audit Committee Member Retainer
	$12,500.00
	USD






____________________________________________________________________________


DIRECTOR EQUITY COMPENSATION
____________________________________________________________________________


Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”) with a value of $120,000 (# of RSUs determined by dividing $120,000 by the 90-day average close price ending on 01 DEC each year). RSUs are subject to a one year cliff vesting from the date of grant.












Exhibit 10.7(a)









____________________________________________________________________________
EDUCATIONAL EXPENSE REIMBURSMENT
____________________________________________________________________________




Plexus will reimburse each director for the out-of-pocket cost associated with one educational seminar per year that is designed to educate directors on their obligations as directors, best practices in corporate governance, or the skills necessary to be more effective directors. 


____________________________________________________________________________
TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
____________________________________________________________________________




All directors will receive reimbursement for reasonable out-of-pocket travel expenses (e.g. airfare, hotel, rental car and meals) incurred in connection with meetings and educational seminars upon providing receipts. 




____________________________________________________________________________
RETAINER AND REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENT
____________________________________________________________________________




All retainers and expense reimbursements are typically paid by Plexus quarterly at the time of quarterly Board meetings.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 137 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                             H. J. RES. 137

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1999, and 
                          for other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 137

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1999, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That section 106(c) of Public 
Law 105-240 is further amended by striking ``October 20, 1998'' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``October 21, 1998''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 19, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3646

___________ Gary Goss, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States State of Arkansas; University of * District Court for the Eastern Arkansas, of the State of Arkansas; * District of Arkansas. University of Arkansas Cooperative * Services; and University of Arkansas * Board of Trustees, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: April 17, 1998 Filed: January 6, 1999

___________ Before BEAM, JOHN R. GIBSON, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circui t Judges.

___________ MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. Gary Goss brought this action pursuant to the Age Discrimination i n Employme nt

Act, see 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, against the State of Arkansas, th e Un iversity of Arkansas, the University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service , and the University of Arkansas Board of Trustees. The defendants moved fo r summary-2-

judgment on the ground, inter alia , that they were immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment, and Mr. Goss co untered that Congress had specifically made the several stat es subject to suit for age discrimination in 29 U.S.C. § 630(b)(2). The distric t court, relying on it s previous decision in Hawn v. Sugg , No. LR-C-95-831 (E.D. Ark. May 12, 1997), rev'd , No. 97-2613, 1998 WL 813823 (8th Cir. Nov. 20, 1998) ( pe r cur iam), held that the abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity contained in th e st atute was a constitutional exercise of congressional authority, and thus denied th e defendants' motion for summary judgment.
We recen tly ruled in Humenansky v. Regents of the University of Minnesota , 152 F.3d 822, 828 (8th Cir. 199 8), that § 630(b)(2) does not in fact abrogate Eleventh Amendme nt

immunity and, moreover, that even if it purported to, it could not hav e been enacted pursuant to the power of Congress toenforce the Fourteenth Amendment and thus would have been uncons titutional. Humenanskyis on all fours with this case and disposes of it entirely.
We therefore reverse the judgment of the district court and remand for suc h further proceedings, if any, as the district court finds are not inconsistent with thi s opinion. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

No. 95-30899

Summary Calendar

_______________

MILFORD LEE,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS

TED BERTHELOT, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

(CA-93-1004-A)

_________________________

April 9, 1996

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Milford Lee appeals from summary judgments dated January 5,

1995, and July 25, 1995, in favor of defendants in his civil rights

suit with supplemental state law claims. Lee’s arguments on

appeal, regarding his official and personal capacity suits, are

dismissed for failing to provide an argument as required by FED. R.

APP. P. 28(a)(6). See Moore v. FDIC, 993 F.2d 106, 107 (5th Cir.
2

1993). We have reviewed the record and Lee’s brief regarding the

alleged unconstitutional seizure and affirm the summary judgment

for essentially the same reasons set forth by the district court.

AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.2

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Encompass Services Corporation:

   We consent to the use of our report dated February 19, 2002 except as to
Note 17, which is as of June 28, 2002, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets as of December 31, 2001 and 2000 and the related consolidated statements
of operations, shareholders' equity and other comprehensive income and cash
flows for the years then ended, which report appears in Encompass Services
Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A dated July 1, 2002, incorporated
herein by reference and to the reference to our firm under the heading
"Experts" in the prospectus. Our report refers to a change in accounting for
derivative instruments and hedging activities.

KPMG LLP

Houston, Texas

September 11, 2002
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                        Independent Accountants' Consent
                        --------------------------------


The Board of Directors
Nuevo Energy Company:

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statement(No. 333-XXXXX) on Form S-8 of Nuevo Energy Company of our report dated
February 16, 1996, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Nuevo Energy
Company as of December 31, 1995 and 1994, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1995, which report
appears in the December 31, 1995 annual report on Form 10-K of Nuevo Energy
Company, and of our reports dated December 20, 1995, relating to the statements
of revenues and direct operating expenses of the Point Pedernales Properties for
each of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1995, and dated
February 12, 1996, relating to the statements of revenues and direct operating
expenses of the Unocal Properties for each of the years in the three-year period
ended June 30, 1995, which reports appear in the Form 8-K dated April 9, 1996
(as amended by Form 8-K/A dated November 25, 1996), and to the reference to our
firm under the heading "Experts" in the prospectus.


                                        /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
                                        _________________________
                                        KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP




Houston, Texas
January 15, 1997
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eric L. JACKSON, a/k/a Tango, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7113

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 28, 2017

*778Eric L. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hugh McWilliams, Jr., John Castle Parr, Assistant United States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eric L. Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying Jackson’s pro se motion seeking multiple forms of relief from his 2001 criminal judgment, including a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual and the issuance of a writ of audita quere-la. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. *See United States v.*Jackson, No. 5:01-cr-00004-FPS-MJA-1 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 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*
```

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16984]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06498]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

Income Taxes

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register 
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most 
recent an1nual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 (Sec. Sec.  
1.170 to 1.300), revised as of April 1, 2021, in section 1.263A-3, 
remove paragraphs (i), (ii), (iii), and (2)(B) that follow paragraph 
(a)(2)(iii).

[FR Doc. 2022-06498 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
```
No. 11-10306.

#### Laloudakis *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1








Certification Required by 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350


(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








In connection with the filing by Millennia, Inc. (the "Company") of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies:





1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











Date: July 27, 2010/s/ Kevin B. HalterKevin B. Halter, Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06881]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1


Income Taxes

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register 
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most 
recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 (Sec. Sec.  
1.641 to 1.850), revised as of April 1, 2021, make the following 
corrections:

0
1. In section 1.817A-1, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  1.817A-1   Certain modified guaranteed contracts.

* * * * *
    (c) Applicability dates. Paragraph (b) of this section applies to 
taxable years beginning after October 13, 2020. However, a taxpayer may 
choose to apply the rules of paragraph (b) of this section for a 
taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017, the effective date of 
the revision of section 807 by Public Law 115-97, and on or before 
October 13, 2020, provided the taxpayer consistently applies the rules 
of paragraph (b) of this section to that taxable year and all 
subsequent taxable years. See section 7805(b)(7). For taxable years 
beginning on or before October 13, 2020, see paragraph (b) of this 
section as contained in 26 CFR part 1 revised as of April 1, 2020.
* * * * *


1.818-2   [Amended]

0
2. In section 1.818-2, remove paragraph (c).

[FR Doc. 2022-06881 Filed 3-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129601 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 129601 

 COA: 260327 

Cheboygan CC: 80-000884-FY

ROBERT WAYNE VIEAU,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 16, 2005 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would remand this case to the Cheboygan Circuit 

Court for a new trial. 

d0120 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 27, 2006 

Clerk
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dearngre Tryvon KELLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-4602

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 5, 2018

Decided: February 23, 2018

*287Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Kathleen A. Gleason, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Matthew G.T. Martin, United States. Attorney, Michael A. DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dearngre Tryvon Kelley pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012). He was sentenced to 60 months in prison. Kelley appeals, raising one issue. We affirm.

According to the presentence investigation report, Kelley’s base offense level was 20 because he had a previous felony conviction of North Carolina common law robbery, which the probation officer deemed a crime of violence. *See*U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) (2015) (base offense level 20 if defendant committed offense after sustaining one felony conviction of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense). Kelley initially contended that the North Carolina offense was improperly treated as a crime of violence under the Guideline. However, in his corrected opening brief, Kelley states that, in light of *United States v. Gattis,*877 F.3d 150 (4th Cir. 2017), his argument lacks merit.

In *Gattis,*we held that a “North Carolina common law robbery conviction categorically qualifie[s] as a felony conviction for a crime of violence, as provided in [USSG] § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A),” *Id.*at 152. As Kelley now concedes, *Gattis*is dispositive in this case.

We therefore affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
1A

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 113

Approving the location of a Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial in the Nation’s

Capital.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 4, 1998

Mrs. MORELLA (for herself, Mr. DIXON, and Mr. CUMMINGS), introduced the

following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the location of a Martin Luther King, Jr.,

Memorial in the Nation’s Capital.

Whereas section 508 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands

Management Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note; 110

Stat. 4157) authorized the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity

to establish a memorial on Federal land in the District

of Columbia to honor Martin Luther King, Jr.;

Whereas section 6(a) of the Commemorative Works Act (40

U.S.C. 1006(a)) provides that the location of a commemorative work in the area described as Area I (within

the meaning of the Act) shall be deemed not authorized

unless approved by law not later than 150 days after notification to Congress that the Secretary of the Interior

recommends location of the commemorative work in Area

I; and
2

•HJ 113 IH

Whereas the Secretary of the Interior has notified Congress

of the recommendation of the Secretary that the memorial be located in Area I: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., MEMORIAL.

4 The location of the commemorative work to honor

5 Martin Luther King, Jr., authorized by section 508 of the

6 Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of

7 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note; 110 Stat. 4157), within Area

8 I is approved under section 6(a) of the Commemorative

9 Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1006(a)).

Æ
**EXHIBIT ITEM 31.1**

 

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

 

I,Charles T. Chrietzberg, Jr. certify that:

 

1.               I have read this quarterly report on Form10-QSB of Northern California Bancorp, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this annual report;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for theregistrant and have:

 

a)              designed such disclosure controls andprocedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report isbeing prepared;

 

b)             evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period (the “EvaluationDate”); and

 

c)              presented in this annual report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and proceduresbased on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee or registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

a)              all significant deficiencies in the design oroperation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and haveidentified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internalcontrols; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal controls; and

 

6.               The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have indicated in this annual report whether there were significant changesin internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affectinternal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.

 

 
| Date: May  10, 2005 | /s/ Charles  T. Chrietzberg, Jr. |   |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Charles T.  Chrietzberg, Jr.          |
|                     | Chairman of  the Board &          |
|                     | Chief  Executive Officer              |

 

----
IIA

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 135

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 14 (legislative day, OCTOBER 2), 1998

Received

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

1999, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 106(c) of Public Law 105–240 is further
2

HJ 135 RDS

1 amended by striking ‘‘October 14, 1998’’ and inserting in

2 lieu thereof ‘‘October 16, 1998’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 14,

1998.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.