alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

AMENDMENT No. 1 
 To

 CELGENE CORPORATION 

2008 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 

(AMENDED AND RESTATED AS OF APRIL 17, 2013) 

WHEREAS, Celgene Corporation (the “Company”) maintains the Celgene Corporation 2008 Stock Incentive Plan (Amended and
Restated as of April 17, 2013) (the “Plan”); 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 14 of the Plan, the Board of
Directors of the Company (the “Board”) may at any time, and from time to time, amend, in whole or in part, any or all of the provisions of the Plan, subject to stockholder approval in certain instances; and 

WHEREAS, the Board has authorized an amendment to the Plan, effective as of April 17, 2014, subject to stockholder approval at the
Company’s annual meeting of stockholders occurring on June 18, 2014 (the “2014 Annual Meeting”). 
 NOW,
THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, subject to stockholder approval at the 2014 Annual Meeting, as follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 2.7 of the Plan is amended to substitute the phrase “Rule 5605(a)(2) of the NASDAQ Listing Rules” for the phrase “NASD Rule 4200(a)(15) of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
Rulebook”. 

  

	 	2.	The first sentence of Section 4.1(a) of the Plan is amended in its entirety, effective as of the date of the 2014 Annual Meeting and subject to stockholder approval at the 2014 Annual Meeting, to read as follows:


 “The aggregate number of shares of Common Stock which may be issued or used for reference purposes
under this Plan or with respect to which all Awards may be granted shall not exceed 113,981,641 shares (subject to any increase or decrease pursuant to Section 4.2).” 

 

	 	3.	Article 18 of the Plan is amended in its entirety, effective as of the date of the 2014 Annual Meeting and subject to stockholder approval at the 2014 Annual Meeting, to read as follows: 


“Article 18. 
 TERM OF PLAN

 No Award shall be granted pursuant to the Plan on or after April 17, 2024, but Awards granted prior to such date
may, and the Committee’s authority to administer the terms of such Awards shall, extend beyond that date; provided, however, that no Award (other than a Stock Option or Stock Appreciation Right) that is intended to be








 
“performance-based” under Section 162(m) of the Code shall be granted on or after the first meeting of the stockholders in the fifth year following the year in which the
stockholders approve the Performance Goals set forth on Exhibit A unless the Performance Goals set forth on Exhibit A are reapproved (or other designated performance goals are approved) by the stockholders no later than the first stockholder meeting
that occurs in the fifth year following the year in which stockholders approve the Performance Goals set forth on Exhibit A.” 
  

	 	4.	Except as specifically amended hereby, the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects and remains in full force and effect.
Certificate of Amendment of the
                Certificate of Incorporation of EDO Corporation
               Under Section 805 of the Business Corporation Law

Frank A. Fariello, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Marvin D.
Genzer, the Secretary, of EDO Corporation, certify as follows:

1. The name of the corporation is EDO Corporation (the "Company").

2. The Certificate of Incorporation was filed by the Department of State on
October 16, 1925.

3. The Certificate of Incorporation is amended to change the location of the
office of the Company and the address to which the Secretary of State shall
mail a copy of process in any action or proceeding against the Company that is
served upon him or her.

4. Article FOURTH of the Certificate of Incorporation is amended to read as
follows:

         The office of the Corporation is to be located in the City of New
         York, Borough of Manhattan, County of New York and State of New York.
         The Secretary of State of the State of New York is hereby designated
         as the agent of the Corporation upon whom process in any action or
         proceeding against it may be served within the State of New York, and
         the address to which the Secretary of State shall mail a copy of any
         process against the Corporation which may be served upon him or her
         pursuant to law is EDO Corporation, 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 5010,
         New York, NY 10165.

5. The above amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation was authorized by
vote of the Company's Board of Directors, pursuant to Sections 803(b)(1) and
803(b)(2) of the New York Business Corporation Law.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have executed this certificate and affirm the truth of
the statements set forth herein under penalty of perjury on this 29 day of
July, 1998.

s/Frank A. Fariello
----------------------------------
Frank A. Fariello
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer


s/Marvin D. Genzer
----------------------------------
Marvin D. Genzer
Secretary
No. 10-1483.

#### Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.-Petrobras, Petitioner v. Transcor Astra Group, S.A.

565 U.S. 824, 132 S. Ct. 113,

181 L. Ed. 2d 38,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5374.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 409 Fed. Appx. 787.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3153 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                      December 22 (legislative day, December 21), 2020.
    Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 
3153) entitled ``An Act to direct the Director of the National Science 
Foundation to support research on opioid addiction, and for other 
purposes.'', do pass with the following

                               AMENDMENT:

             Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
      following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Expanding Findings 
for Federal Opioid Research and Treatment Act'' or the ``EFFORT Act''.
    (b) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
            (1) research gaps currently exist in the prevention and 
        treatment of opioid addiction;
            (2) the National Science Foundation's research on opioid 
        addiction has increased understanding of the neuroscience of 
        addiction, substance abuse intervention, the role of illicit 
        supply networks, the secondary effects on families, the use of 
        technology to address the opioid epidemic, and options for 
        alternative, non-addictive therapeutics for pain; and
            (3) the National Science Foundation and the National 
        Institutes of Health have recognized that fundamental questions 
        in basic, clinical, and translational research would benefit 
        greatly from multidisciplinary approaches and collaboration.

SEC. 2. NSF SUPPORT OF RESEARCH ON OPIOID ADDICTION.

    The Director of the National Science Foundation, in consultation 
with the Director of the National Institutes of Health, shall support 
merit-reviewed and competitively awarded research on the science of 
opioid addiction.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
116th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H.R. 3153

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENT
```
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dectron Internationale Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mauro
Parissi, Chief Financial 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, that:

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

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



                                                 By: /s/ Mauro Parissi
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Name:   Mauro Parissi
                                                 Title:  Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Anthony Morris and Rohan Golding, Respondents.

[60 NYS3d 322]

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Carter, J.), dated August 23, 2016, which, after a hearing on that branch of the omnibus motion of the defendant Anthony Morris which was to suppress physical evidence and pursuant to a stipulation in lieu of motions of the defendant Rohan Golding, granted suppression of physical evidence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

On January 14, 2015, just before 9:30 p.m., two police officers responded to a report of a shooting involving a white Infiniti SUV with several occupants, including one female. Approximately 15 minutes later and eight or nine blocks away from the location of the reported shooting, the officers observed an SUV matching that description parked in a strip mall parking lot, and a woman standing next to it. As the officers approached in their vehicle, the woman walked away, and the driver of the SUV began to drive away. The officers pulled the SUV over, exited their vehicle, and approached the SUV on foot, one officer on each side of it. The officers observed that the two male occupants, the defendants herein, were leaning toward each other, and each had an elbow on the SUV’s center console. The officers did not observe any contraband or firearms inside the SUV. The driver complied with the officers’ request to provide his license and registration, following which the defendants were removed from the SUV, frisked, handcuffed, and seated on a nearby curb to wait for eyewitnesses to the shooting to arrive. Additional officers arrived, one of whom approached the SUV and, noticing that the center console was slightly elevated, opened it and found a handgun. The defend*730ants were then arrested. The eyewitnesses subsequently arrived and confirmed that the defendants were not the persons who had committed the shooting. A second handgun was later found in the center console.

“[Ajbsent probable cause, it is unlawful for a police officer to invade the interior of a stopped vehicle once the suspects have been removed and patted down without incident, as any immediate threat to the officers’ safety has consequently been eliminated” *(People v Mundo,*99 NY2d 55, 58 [2002]; *see People v Carvey,*89 NY2d 707, 710 [1997]; *People v Torres,*74 NY2d 224, 226 [1989]; *People v Baksh,*113 AD3d 626, 628 [2014]; *People v Sanchez,*226 AD2d 284 [1996]; *People v Stewart,*199 AD2d 1043, 1044 [1993]; *People v Snyder,*178 AD2d 757, 758 [1991], *affd*80 NY2d 815 [1992]).

Under the circumstances here, where the defendants had been removed from the SUV, the police lacked probable cause for a warrantless search of its center console, and the weapons found as a result were properly suppressed *(see People v Baksh,*113 AD3d at 628; *People v Vargas,*89 AD3d 771, 772 [2011]; *People v Stewart,*199 AD2d at 1044; *People v Snyder,*178 AD2d at 758).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted suppression of the physical evidence seized from the SUV.

Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Christopher, JJ., concur.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 6, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00227

- CV

IN RE M.I.A., A CHILD

, Appellant

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017

- PA

- 02030 The Honorable Cynthia Marie Chapa, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

This is an appeal from the termination of parental rights to minor children. Appellant has filed a brief that identifies minor children by name and discloses their dates of birth in the appendix. The Texas Rul es of Appellate Procedure prohibit the filing of documents that disclose a minor’s name or date of birth, and the rules require that such information be redacted before filing. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 9.8(b)(1), 9.9(a)

- (c).

W e therefore strike appellant’s brief and order that the brief and appendix, appropriately redacted, be refiled within 3 days of this order.

___________________ ______________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 6th day of June, 2019

.

_________________ __________________ K eith E. H ottle

, Clerk of Court
No. 10-11080.

#### Carlos Garay, Petitioner v. Department of Management Services, Division of Retirement.

565 U.S. 866, 132 S. Ct. 211,

181 L. Ed. 2d 114,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6447,

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, denied.

Same case below, 46 So. 3d 1227.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18675]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers


Review of Draft Scoping Document, Devils Lake, North Dakota, 
Emergency Outlet

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: A Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental impact 
Statement for an outlet from Devils Lake to the Sheyenne River in North 
Dakota was published in the Federal Register on 21 October 1997.
    As part of the National Environmental Policy Act process, the Corps 
of Engineers has conducted agency and public meetings on the project. 
Based on the results of those meetings and comments received in 
response to the meetings, the Corps of Engineers has prepared a draft 
Scoping Document for the project. The Scoping Document identifies the 
concerns and alternatives that will be addressed in the Environmental 
impact Statement and defines the geographic scope of the study.
    The draft Scoping Document is being distributed for public and 
agency review, after which a final Scoping Document will be prepared. 
The comment period and the address for submitting comments will be 
identified in the document. We anticipate the comment period will end 
about 28 August 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Questions concerning the Scoping Document can be directed to: 
Lieutenant Colonel William J. Breyfogle, District Engineer, St. Paul 
District, Corps of Engineers, ATTN: Mr. Robert Whiting, 190 Fifth 
Street East, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1638.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We anticipate that the Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement will be available to the public in the fall of 1999. 
The Environmental Impact Statement would be supplemented as 
appropriate.

    Dated: June 26, 1998.
William J. Breyfogle,
Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District Engineer.
[FR Doc. 98-18675 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-CY-M
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18725]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 33579]


Gauley River Railroad, LLC--Purchase, Lease and Operation 
Exemption--CSX Transportation, Inc.

    Gauley River Railroad, LLC (GRIV), a noncarrier, has filed a notice 
of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to purchase from CSX Transportation, 
Inc. (CSXT) and operate approximately 30.7 miles of rail line in West 
Virginia.<SUP>1</SUP> GRIV will acquire two rail line segments: (1) 
between milepost BUE-119 (Valuation Station 5035+89.6) near Cowen, WV, 
and milepost BUE-129 (Valuation Station 5563+89.6) at Allingdale, WV 
(Line A) and (2) between milepost BUE-12.4 (Valuation Station 
1096+48.2) at Muddlety Falls, WV, and milepost BUE-20.7 (Valuation 
Station 1092+45), including the McMillion Creek Branch, Delmont Branch, 
and all other connecting spur and sidetracks (Line C). GRIV will also 
sublease from CSXT a third line segment, which connects or bridges 
together Line A and Line C, extending from milepost BUE-0.0 (Valuation 
Station 441+43) at Allingdale, WV, to milepost BUE-12.4 (Valuation 
Station 649+86.8) at Muddlety Falls, WV (Line B). Line B serves as a 
connecting stretch of railroad linking together Lines A, B, and 
C.<SUP>2</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ GRIV certifies that its projected revenues will not exceed 
those that would qualify it as a Class III carrier.
    \2\ Line B is currently owned by Strouds Creek and Muddlety 
Railroad (SC&M). SC&M leases the line to CSXT. According to CSXT's 
lease agreement with SC&M, CSXT is permitted to enter into the 
contemplated sublease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transaction was expected to be consummated on or shortly after 
June 25, 1998.
    If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, 
the exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption 
under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a 
petition to revoke will not automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 33579, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K Street, NW, 
Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must 
be served on Keith G. O'Brien, Esq., Rea, Cross & Auchincloss, Suite 
570, 1707 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our website at 
``WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.''

    Decided: July 6, 1998.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18725 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
No. 10-9600.

#### Jessie Wayne Pillette, Petitioner v. Mary Berghuis, Warden.

565 U.S. 829, 132 S. Ct. 125,

181 L. Ed. 2d 47,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5286.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 408 Fed. Appx. 873.
No. 10-706.

#### Roger Marx Desenberg, Petitioner v. Google, Inc.

562 U.S. 1140, 131 S. Ct. 962,

178 L. Ed. 2d 757,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 55.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.

Same case below, 392 Fed. Appx. 868.
Order filed, December 18, 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00526

- CV

____________ SUSANA I. VILLALPAND O , Appellant

V.

ARMANDO VILLALPANDO , Appellee

On Appeal from the 257th District Court

Harris County, Tex as Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 30887



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due October 06, 2014

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On October 08, 2014 , this court granted the court reporter s motion
for extension of time to file the record until November 05, 2014

. On November 12, 2014 , this court granted the court reporter ’ s second motion for extension of
time to file the record until December 11, 2014

. The record has not been fil ed withthe court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the

following order.

We order Eunice Tillman , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. No further extensi on will be
entertained

. The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If Eunice
Tillman does not timely file the record as ord ered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the
record.

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS ON PAGES 2 TO 8 OF THE
COMPANY'S JUNE 30, 1997 AUDITORS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          20,814
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   46,886
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,660)
<INVENTORY>                                     12,810
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                80,193
<PP&E>                                         403,462
<DEPRECIATION>                                (89,491)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 434,757
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           79,663
<BONDS>                                        260,089
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           714
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,884
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   434,757
<SALES>                                        373,940
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               382,830
<CGS>                                          244,780
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  354,877
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              23,817
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,136
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,966
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,170
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (7,861)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,843)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (8.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Year,NTPFS,NNDSS2016,349,3802017,402,4062018,368,3882019,451,4092020,157,182
**Joint Meeting**

**Supply PRC and US DoD SAP Requirements Task ForceJune 3, 2004**

**MILS Defense Requirements (DRQs)**

0900 – 0915Introductions and Admin

0915 – 1000Review Meeting Objectives

1000 – 1030Review SAP Proposed Solution for Priority, SAP Requirements

Task Force

Advice, and Status Codes

Break

1045 – 1200Individual Solution Presentations:

DLA, Navy, LMP 

Lunch

1300 – 1430Develop Feedback for SAP

Break

1445 – 1600DoD MILS/DLMS Strategy - Next Steps

1600 – 1630Summary and Action Item Review

Additional Background Materials:  

Advice

Priority

Status
ssvio isyid

03iyoS3Hd

<&

cS1

r»;25«i|* „,

jit^,J <oCuf

S|S<g U- 5 Z 2 U. p ui K O co a. q.

o

I

o

COo

C\f

00I

DC

LU

DC

r

CO

LUOXX

0.

*>&

ujQo

o£cr

ZtnL

LU3U

coca

OSI

a: do

u

.:Pi

rffi