alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w3



 





EXHIBIT 10.3



AMENDMENT TO EG&G TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT

PLAN




     The EG&G Technical Services, Inc. Employees Retirement Plan (“Plan”) is
hereby amended as of the date below and is effective December 31, 2004 as
follows:





	1.	 	Section 1.1 is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:






“1.1 “Accrued Benefit” means, as of any date of determination, the
normal Retirement Income computed under Section 4.1.”





	2.	 	Section 4.1(d) is added to the Plan to read in its entirety as follows:






“4.1(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan
to the contrary, no further benefits shall accrue under the
Plan for any period occurring after December 31, 2004 for
any Participant who is employed at the National Radar
Testing Facility and whose terms of employment are governed
by a collective bargaining agreement between the
International Association of Machinists Union and the
Employer, except as otherwise may be required by Section
416 of the Code and other applicable laws and regulations.
For Plan Years beginning on and after January 1, 2005, the
benefits of any Participant described in the preceding
sentence shall be calculated as set forth in Section
4.1(b)(i) of the Plan; provided, however, that the affected
Participant’s Credited Service, Earnings and the Social
Security Wage Base under Section 4.1(b)(i)(B) shall be
calculated as of December 31, 2004.”





	3.	 	All capitalized terms not defined herein will have the meaning assigned to
them in the Plan.







	4.	 	Except as amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Plan
shall remain in full force and effect.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	URS CORPORATION, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	                       /s/ Mary Sullivan
 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Name: Mary Sullivan, Vice President of

Human Resources

Date: November 18, 2004
# DLA Distribution Corpus Christi, Texas, PPP&M Team wins Defense Department Packaging Achievement Award

/ Published Aug. 5, 2020
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
The Preservation, Packaging, Packing and Marking team from Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Corpus Christi, Texas, received the 2019 Defense Department Packaging Achievement Award.

The DDCT PPP&M Team preserved and packaged 67,210 assets valued at over $3.5 billion and de-packaged over 16,000 assets in support of material release orders with a value of over $1.2 billion to provision industrial operations at the Corpus Christi Army Depot.

DDCT initiated a packaging remediation and compliance program that resulted in significantly exceeding enterprise goals for inventory accuracy. The box shop saved over $168,000 in the reutilization of packaging material and reusable crates. The team continued their initiative to pack and de-pack at the point of production with CCAD in four major shops in fiscal year 2019. These initiatives allowed CCAD employees to focus on the mechanical piece of production, ultimately reducing their production turn-around time for these assets.

In particular, the T-700 engines had an average improved turn-around time of 21 days. This is a huge win for CCAD, as it improves their ability to compete for major contracts regarding these assets. It’s also a major win for DLA Distribution as it creates increased revenue.

The packaging team also pursues operational excellence in support of audit readiness by establishing and completing all goals and milestones for standard operating procedure integration and compliance. Overall, the DDCT PPP&M team always strives to provide second mile service and their efforts exemplify DDCT’s mantra of “Warfighter Obsession” and being a “Life line to the Flight line.”
# Advanced Flight Maneuvers

# <***)**~~** Fly a 4 point square box clockwise and rotate the phantom in the direction of travel.**,~** 

# ' ''' ' 

## '**------ -----------**  

# ®s s@ 

# &®$**~~** Fly a circle counter-clockwise and keep the aircraft nose pointed in the direction of travel. Be sure to keep the altitude the same and the circle as uniform as possible.



# m Fly a circle counter-clockwise with the aircraft nose pointed atthe center ofthe circle. Be sure to keep the altitude the same and the circle as uniform as possible.

# Advanced Flight Maneuvers<***) 

# D Fly a figure 8 without rotating the Phantom. Be sure to keep the altitude the same and the circle as uniform as possible.

# ~**~ -------...** **~** 

# ,'

... '+-
-· ' ,

.............J/J!IItl--

___**c."!.----- ~**  

# ,----
...

# --**~** 

# ---

......**~** 

### ,1\ \ ',



### ... 

## ,'

............

# ____**-----------**
Fly a Figure 8 with the aircraft nose of the Phantom pointed in the direction of travel. Be sure to keep the altitude the same and the circle as uniform as possible.

Fly Figure 8 patterns while experimenting with different orientations. For example, aircraft nose always pointed in a given direction or opposite/left/right the direction of travel, etc. Be sure to keep the altitude thesame and the circle as uniform as possible.

# Emergency Situations 

# D

EJ Return Home 

### & Land Mode Be sure you are in a large open area. Before you take off, make sure you have a good GPS lock by ensuring your LED indicators are flashing Green. Fly the Phantom at least 50ft away from your take off point. Turn off the Remote Controller. The Phantom will enter it's failsafe Return-To-Home Mode. Let the Phantom finish it's routine and land itselfwithin 2 meters of the take off point.



# • 15 meters



### Intercepting Return Home 

### & Land Mode Be sure you are in a large open area. Before you take off, make sure you have a good GPS lock by ensuring your LED indicators are flashing Green. Fly the Phantom 50ft away from your take off point. Turn off the Remote Controller. The Phantom will enter it's failsafe Return-To-Home Mode. When the Phantom is returning home, you can intercept RTH Mode by switching the Sl Switch from the top position to the middle or lower position, then continue flying the Phantom. 

# ltr

-**----** - ' 

# ' • 15 meters

## www.dji.com

Copyright:2014 DJIInnovations. All Rights Reserved

.
# DLA delivers personal protective equipment to nursing homes across the country

/ Published July 16, 2020
PHILADELPHIA, 
The Defense Logistics Agency is shipping a second 7-day supply of COVID-19 personal protective equipment to support staff and residents at over 15,000 nursing homes nationwide after completing delivery of $67 million worth of equipment June 12.

The DLA Troop Support contract, which was awarded April 27, is being funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in response to a White House Coronavirus Task Force request for assembly and delivery of personal protective equipment kits.

“We do things in terms of support to nursing homes and at-risk populations across the U.S. that no one else does, and I know everyone at DLA Troop Support takes that solemn obligation and responsibility very seriously,” said DLA Troop Support Commander Army Brig. Gen. Gavin Lawrence.

The contract is for 1.25 million pairs of protective eyewear, 13.2 million medical gowns, 14.6 million medical masks and 66.27 million pairs of nitrile gloves, as well as kit assembly and delivery in two phases.

The final shipment of phase one went out June 10, and shipments for phase two began June 17.

Bill Seltzer, administrator of The Waters of Winchester, a nursing home in Winchester, Tennessee, said he appreciates DLA’s support.

“The kits were very helpful. There was a recognition of a lack of PPE at the front end of [the COVID-19 pandemic], and the supplies we received helped us tremendously,” he said. “It gave us time to get our steady-state supply up to where it’s needed for everyday operation.”

Lawrence thanked his team for their commitment to success.

“Our workforce is dedicated to providing logistics solutions such as this to our military and whole-of-government customers. When the nation calls, we answer – and deliver,” he said.

By July 9, DLA had completed 14,456 contracting actions worth $1.4 billion in support of COVID-19 response for the Defense Department and other federal agencies. News and a comprehensive infographic depicting DLA’s coronavirus support are available at www.dla.mil/info/coronavirus.
No. 10M29.

#### B. D. S. D., Petitioner v. Texas.

562 U.S. 820, 131 S. Ct. 377,

178 L. Ed. 2d 13,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6600.

October 4, 2010.

Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis without an affidavit of indigency executed by petitioner denied.

Same case below, 289 S.W.3d 889.
Exhibit
15.13



CONSENT



We
hereby consent to the reference to our fairness opinion relating effective interest of Bank Hapoalim Ltd.'s loan for the year
ended December 31, 2014, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Elbit Imaging Ltd., and to the incorporation by reference
of this Annual Report in the Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-194519) and in the Registration Statement
on Form F-3 (Registration No. 333-172122) and in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-117509, No. 333-130852,
No. 333-136684 and No. 333-152820) of Elbit Imaging Ltd.



This
consent is not to be construed as an admission that we are an expert or that we are a person whose consent is required to be filed
under the provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.



|/s/
    Financial Immunities Dealing Room Ltd. | 
|---------------------------------------------- | 
|Financial
    Immunities Dealing Room Ltd.     | 
|                                               | 
|Ness
    Ziona, Israel                         | 
|November
    9, 2017                           |
# Employee Spotlight: Heather Judd

/ Published Feb. 2, 2022
RICHMOND, Va., 
*Employee spotlight regularly features outstanding non-supervisory personnel from throughout the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation and other DLA employees on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia. Organizational directors may submit names of employees they wish to feature in this column to DLA Aviation Public Affairs. For more information, call (804) 279-3139.*

**Name:** Heather Judd

**Organization:** DLA Aviation at Ogden, Utah

**Years of Service:** 6 months

**What is your job title, and what do you do, specifically?**  I am a customer service technician. I am part of a team supporting the warfighter that processes and resolves problems associated with customer parts orders to ensure assets are available to the customer when and where needed. I facilitate resolution of backorders or delinquent contracts having an impact on unfilled orders and provide timely and viable resolutions to emergency supply needs in support of the 309th Missile Maintenance Group at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.

**What would you say has been your major contributions to your organization this year in your job?**My major contribution has been mitigating backorders by researching multiple DLA and Air Force systems to locate contract information, backorder status, substitute national stock numbers or blocks restricting release of assets. After researching the information, I reach out the appropriate personnel, contractor or shipping carrier to resolve issues causing delays in critical assets being provided to the shops.

**What aspect(s) of your current job gives you the most personal satisfaction and why?** I really enjoy researching options when faced with long-lead times and identifying potential sources of supply, shipping delays and implementing resolutions for emergency requirements in support of the warfighter.

**If you could speak directly to the warfighters you support, what would you tell them?** I would want them to know that there are teams of hard working and dedicated individuals operating behind the scenes committed to doing everything possible to support them in defending our nation.

**What was your first job?** My first job, or jobs, was in my early teens. I stocked shelves at a grocery store and also worked at a mink farm.

**What is the most surprising/unexpected thing others don’t know about you?** When I was 20-years old, I went from living with my parents to building my first home, by myself.

**What are some of your passions outside of work?** My passions outside of work are hunting, horseback riding, team roping or any activities I do with my son.

**What’s the most thrilling/adventurous thing you have ever done?** I’m an avid hunter and every year, the state of Utah offers a lottery for big game hunting. One year, I drew a mountain lion tag and ended up taking one.  

**What type of music do you most enjoy?** I really enjoy listening to country music.
#### New York Ind. Contrs. Alliance, Matter of, v Liu

1st Dept: 144 AD3d 505

denied
No. 10M25.

#### Toni Clark, Petitioner v. National Credit Union Administration.

562 U.S. 819, 131 S. Ct. 376,

178 L. Ed. 2d 12,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6748.

October 4, 2010.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.

*13Same case below, 354 Fed. Appx. 805.
#### Erie Ins. Exchange ex rel. Sullivan v. Pennsylvania Ins. Dept.; Erie Indemnity Co., In re

08/10/2016

90 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Cmwlth., 133 A.3d 102
#### In the Matter of Diallo R.A. Madison, Petitioner, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

[767 NYS2d 709]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Ulster County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner challenges a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting the unauthorized use of a controlled substance after his urine twice tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report, the two positive urinalysis test results and the testimony presented at the disciplinary hearing provide substantial evidence of his guilt *(see Matter of Gonzalez v Selsky,*301 AD2d 1019, 1020 [2003]; *Matter of Irons v Goord,*283 AD2d 705 [2001]). Petitioner’s assertion that the medications he was taking at the time of the urinalysis testing resulted in false positive results was countered by testimony of a nurse at the facility’s medical unit, as well as by that of a representative from the manufacturer of the urinalysis testing system who opined that the medications in question were incapable of producing false positive test results for the presence of cannabinoids *(see Matter of Woods v Selsky,*291 AD2d 773 [2002]; *Matter of Rowe v Goord,*289 AD2d 764 [2001]).

We reject the contention that petitioner was improperly denied the right to call certain witnesses as the testimony they had to offer would have been either redundant to that given by other witnesses or irrelevant *(see Matter of Madison v Goord,*273 AD2d 557, 558 [2000]). The remaining contentions raised herein have been examined and found to be unpersuasive.

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
#### State of Florida, ex rel. J. H. Sherrill and D. A. Vann, *Relators,*vs. Everglades Drainage District, a Statutory Subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., *Respondents.*

144 So. 655.

Order entered October 20, 1932.

*92*Watson & Pasco & Brown,*for Relators;

*Garter <& Yonge;■ Bedell & Bedell; Evans & Mershon; Alto Adams; Stapp, Gourley, Viwing & Ward,*and *D. L. Southard,*for Respondents.

Per Curiam.

This cause coining on to be heard upon the motions to quash and answers of certain respondent.tax assessors of counties comprised within said Everglades Drainage District, addressed to the alternative writ herein, and it being made to appear to the Court thereby that in certain counties the assessment roll had already been made up and delivered to the tax collector and that in other counties the assessment rolls have been completed and are ready for delivery to the tax collectors as required by statute, and inasmuch as State and County taxes are legally due and payable November 1st, and further, that in view of the fact that the questions involved in this action will require considerable study and deliberation, and that the public interests would be jeopardized by holding up the delivery of the 1932 assessment rolls to the tax collectors until the final decision of this cause;

It is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the alternative writ heretofore issued be so modified as to permit the respondent tax assessors named therein to deliver to the tax collectors of their respective counties the tax assessment rolls for the year 1932 as required by statute.

It is further ordered that all other questions involved or that may be involved in this cause be and they are hereby reserved for further consideration and determination in this cause.

Whitfield, Terrell and Brown, J.J., and Campbell and Bird, Circuit Judges, concur.

Buford, C.J., and Davis, J., disqualified.
MANDATE

Court of Appeals 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00250-CR

AZAN MUHAMMAD JANNAH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 1 of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 

1883398).

TO THE COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF HARRIS COUNTY, 

GREETINGS:

Before this Court, on the 2nd day of April 2015, the case upon appeal to revise or 

to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in these words:

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed 

by the trial court on February 12, 2014. After submitting the 

case on the appellate record and the arguments properly 

raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s 

judgment contains no reversible error. Accordingly, the 

Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below 

for observance.

Judgment rendered April 2, 2015.
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Huddle. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Huddle.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court 

in this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

June 12, 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

 CLERK OF THE COURT
2017-0385.

#### Ackerman v. Bank of New York Mellon.

Miscellaneous case. On respondent’s motion to dismiss. Motion granted. Cause dismissed. On relator’s motion for immediate expedited stay of sale proceedings and stay of collections. Motions denied as moot.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, French, O’Neill, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.
No. 09-11433.

#### Matthew Quigley, Petitioner v. Illinois.

562 U.S. 880, 131 S. Ct. 197,

178 L. Ed. 2d 119,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6903.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, denied.

Same case below, 394 Ill. App. 3d 1114, 369 Ill. Dec. 98, 985 N.E.2d 1084.
```

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of MAXXAM Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does
hereby certify that:

         (a) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2004 of the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

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

Dated: May 10, 2004

                                            /S/           CHARLES E. HURWITZ
                                           --------------------------------------------
                                                       Charles E. Hurwitz
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter
63 of Title 18, United States Code).
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS YEAR-TO-DATE SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
MISSISSIPPI CHEMICAL CORPORATION FISCAL 2001 FIRST QUARTER FORM 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FILING.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000066895
<NAME> MISSISSIPPI CHEMICAL CORPORATION

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,041
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,752
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,122
<INVENTORY>                                     73,558
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               138,570
<PP&E>                                         838,088
<DEPRECIATION>                                 406,891
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 846,162
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,215
<BONDS>                                        214,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           280
<OTHER-SE>                                     383,971
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   846,162
<SALES>                                        120,053
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               120,053
<CGS>                                          122,561
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  134,770
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,459)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (54)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,159
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (20,417)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (8,171)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,246)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,246)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.47)


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rashawn Blakes, Appellant.

[56 NYS3d 891]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chun, J.), rendered April 7, 2014, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel merely because counsel failed to object to certain alleged errors at trial. Rather, the record as a whole demonstrates that counsel made cogent arguments, engaged in searching cross-examination, presented a reasoned theory of defense, and advocated effectively for the defendant, thereby providing him with meaningful representation *(see People v Caban,*5 NY3d 143 [2005]; *People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708 [1998]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137 [1981]; *People v Martin,*141 AD3d 734 [2016]; *People v Belle,*113 AD3d 630 [2014]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Romero,*7 NY3d 911 [2006]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10 [1995]; *People v Forde,*140 AD3d 1085 [2016]; *People v Fitzgerald,*120 AD3d 506 [2014]), and we decline to reach them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Hall and Maltese, JJ., concur.