alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-2090]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

DATE: Weeks of January 26, February 2, 9, and 16, 1998.

PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.

STATUS: Public and Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Week of January 26

Wednesday, January 28
11:30 a.m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if needed).

Week of February 2--Tentative

Wednesday, February 4
11:30 a.m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if needed).

Week of February 9--Tentative

    There are no meetings the week of February 9.

Week of February 16--Tentative

Thursday, February 19
9:30 a.m.--Meeting with Northeast Nuclear on Millstone (Public Meeting) 
(Contact: Bill Travers, 301-415-1200).
12:00 m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (if needed).

    * The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on 
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 
415-1292. Contact person for more information: Bill Hill (301) 415-
1661.
    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet 
at:

http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/schedule.htm

    This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; 
if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to it, 
please contact the Office of the Secretary, Attn: Operations Branch, 
Washington, D.C. 20555 (301-415-1661).
    In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet 
system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission 
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#592e343119372b3a773e362f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ef988287af819d8cc1888099">[email protected]</span></a> or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#14707f63547a66773a737b62"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="26424d516648544508414950">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 23, 1998.
William M. Hill, Jr.,
Secy, Tracking Officer, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-2090 Filed 1-23-98; 2:25 pm]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      12,664,196
<SECURITIES>                                 4,416,120
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,233,870
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,071,699
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,526,427
<PP&E>                                      53,636,587
<DEPRECIATION>                              29,549,319
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             124,793,505
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       20,926,266
<BONDS>                                    100,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 20,100,000
<COMMON>                                        59,990
<OTHER-SE>                                (19,206,458)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               124,793,505
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            44,604,034
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               42,616,848
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                99,345
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           9,606,566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,907,572)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (7,319,113)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,929,864)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,929,864)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
No. 09-8301.

#### John W. Tate, Petitioner v. New Jersey.

559 U.S. 980, 130 S. Ct. 1705,

176 L. Ed. 2d 194,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2022.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, denied.
No. 09-8618.

#### Russell Floyd Freshour, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 960, 130 S. Ct. 1563,

176 L. Ed. 2d 148,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1432.

February 22, 2010.

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

Same case below, 349 Fed. Appx. 849.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 (adopted pursuantto §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned President andChief Executive Officer of Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company forthe quarterly period ended April 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operation of the Company.

 

Date: June 12, 2009

 
|     | /s/  Timothy J. Dodd                     |
|----------|------------------------------------------|
|     |                                     |
|     | Timothy  J. Dodd                         |
| * * | *President and Chief Executive  Officer* |

 

1

----
Kfcv^ fe. V\c^VWCWr£

-Qcxj^iP-icU Gscjtft-4- OC C»PftSrxl?>

SCo_D.oleLaJc^x^.>3_caii£,^So2_

^cx^sLjCXn:\ oH1o3"TJjcfQ^ 785LO 7

iH-sao-c^

*.

(\n

•*r: J=?»^

-nCO

en

-cnO

2:0

Cr*?sP Ho. to^-v C^a^H6~

fe^ p, YUMs, cWv: :

RECEIVED IN

COURTORJRKflNArAPPEACSFEB-^2^015-

, ^ , AMAcedia,Clerk

r^g bftUol-^ "TV^c^iniK- exocx Shncc&£&1q«

fcsSpedrCfJillo Sc*lkPrnU-grl ,

c.c» lo ravfoitsipA Couigi- c^ c^-PP^U c*£L3kxc*s^.

fe^>f^fe CgrAN(A-cjt Ox^A^ic^- oAAcoftjxcao, » &£Jcr3& Cou^ei

^^Wig^ cWfcs> c^Cicfe., kxcN.; V76-^ OteWicA Cocj<^V

QlD^ OuvA Kr^ Ur^r W_Kf ^&3Rci exs c->C ueA-s

jjEvtiasuax^a.-
j[^(aoj&aL- „ -„ . ^^^Cou^kA-^ikxtv4s.

LJ^fVahA- P)V^r^^-o^ c=> —i—i.

_ figyra^ C)C_SV^k^GMki^ss ...

-;.-A^ ^0rH- —

-~?M—-%£- GO -^-Wi.^

_Ccsr^s^M^^ .O^fib^ck^s/L, CtsLd

b^A^ob ^3_J^kotvi io^^Bchta-ir &tak,-&ora_ c\ite^pk\csic._.io

l^A^rH^^CsU&^XU SuOpcfeL J^XlL-SttoLCL!.- - - _ -- - — -

^h^Jik^^

og_ CeQ^h^oj^^ :kx._ctau.icA£^

-Vq :.o^ci^-X^ J^._.^

Tola^V_ir^.._..9^ —

Qcjc^gda^^ I^eas&ck:^ _?bsk _

G^tsU^lQfc^^ - — - --

3*. 3k&*Qc^J^..^ —

cxtstd. a^Jl^dai!^^ K.^bc^.£^b^

0£££&k& Ao__J^&ab££j^^ jUfcCGiUUfcjgb^s ^o.„.__ ^ac^£CL,ixL ...D^^^£^ ._—,
i 

i ~,F 

.i .A r . . . 

t ? 

u) 

“9 

.._. :..* 

‘~ i- OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

ill. 

” IQ AUSTIN 

‘--G..ILD c. MAN” 

17?2ODIIGe*L ” ”.L 

Rcmorablq ,lohn D. R6ed 

Qammirrien6r BuPhu et Labor 8tatbtioo 

Alla tan, Tort&r 

Bids weI- tf&eA 

the owtraot v&n 

on a monthly buir, 

4 rats or $123.00 

ent va8 oontinued un6 nmlth 95 SeptefilbeP I?, Y8M admurt be t&n for the mmwal 

aozltraut sa ~aooPd4Aa~e tith B6aatr of fihe 48th Legir3Mur8,~ Oa 

this Dspartxnsat mqu6at.d th6 

Eward of Cnntrol to maum such needed rpaoo 

awmrdlag to thr provislans of that bill. During-th8t Mm, EwwevaP, thb Pa 

for spaoe Ln the Tribune Build fc 

rroabsrfJb%U 

for th6 rcmth 

of Bepteualacsr vas presented to the Board of Control for ~pp&‘oVSl but VILI X’6tWA%d t0 this Departmeat by &8aron, of rour opln%onr IYor. 05427, 

05565, m%-l 05578. 
Honorable John. D. Reed, Page 2 

%ll you please advise me vhothm or 

not th88@ opinims appl 

I 

in our 0884, duo to 

the f%Ct that CUP l’6At& 8@tWBS8At Y-%1) 0A a 

monthly baeie inetsad of for a epeolflod 

p4rlod of timer ” 

Swate Bill Ho, 266, Chapter 258 of the Regular 

Seerion of the 48tb Legielature vlth rsepeot to offi 

epaoe fop stats 

“sf 

Snoisa Or departmAte dose 8p~l~ to MAW 8g P a eBeAb l x *tlng Up o A the l Yeo tir e de* o f the a o t 

vher e l uoh a@WtWAt i8 UpOA 8 8lOAthly b&818, 88 V.11 88 

to leaee Pgreevmnts rxtmding one peer or mom. Tbe purpO8f3 Of the Act Vat8 to FoQUire a11 PSntd8 for the State 

to be made ia the -er thslwla poizlted out. 

ml8 18 a categorloal M8Y6F to your queetion, 

but in the li@t of your hill 8t8tHi@nt YOU am perhap 

more oonoemed with tho further questian of vhether or 

not the rquhw monthly rental bill fop the BOAth of Septtaeber should be approved and paid, 

Ye have bsretofore held that under ths trme of 

Senate Bill no. 266 all existFag contraote for l paoe oovered 

;&he Aat vere void--thzst Is, tmW.nst~d--u ok Septsmbsr 1, 

See opinlms lo. O-5427 md Ao. 

pow’lot ter. 

O-557 % rsfermd to in 

It therefore beoaas nooaeea~ for mob wncrlse 

and departawnts to obt8iA new rental OP lseee oontracite sffectlve September 1, 1943. 

It is well eettlsd that no 1iabilitJ a&a be ore&ted 

against the state oxoept vhm it la inawred under acme preerie tbg lsr. (see Ft. Worth Csval~ Olub ve. Sh*ppard, 125 

Tsx. 339, 8) S.U. (26) 660.) 

CA septmlbsr 1, 1943, t&m% V18 no prr-exi8tlA&J 

lav other L Wnate Ml1 Zlo. 266 by vhiah euch llabillty 

for mAt41 rpsco fop St&t* a@~olse 4~d departsmAt sould 

be lncwred. 
E 

4 

% 

P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0016 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RILEY JOSEPH LANDWEHR,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 13, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brie f on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 6 2022

06/06/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0016
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-5032

GRIFFIN BROADBAND COMM UNICATIONS, INC.,

and TOTAL TV OF FORT IRWIN, LLC,

Pl aintiffs-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

Robert K. Steinberg , Law Offices of Robert K. Steinberg, of Los Angeles,

California, argued for plaintiffs-appellants.

Joan M. Stentiford , Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division,

United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendantappellee. With her on the br ief were Jeffrey S. Bucholtz , Acting Assist ant Attorney

General, Jeanne E. Davidson , Director, and Mark A. Melnick , Assistant Director.

Appealed from: United States Court of Federal Claims

Judge Christine O.C. MillerNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-5032

GRIFFIN BROADBAND CO MMUNICATIONS, INC.,

and TOTAL TV OF FORT IRWIN, LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States Court of Federal Claims

in CASE NO(S). 06-CV-898

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (MICHEL, Chief Judge , RADER, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED August 12, 2008 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 22, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50708

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GILBERTO DELGADO-RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-112-1-WWJ

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gilberto Delgado-Ramirez appeals his sentence following his

guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry, in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). The district court sentenced him to

27 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and

a $100 special assessment. 

Delgado-Ramirez argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is

unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466

(2000), because it does not require the fact of a prior
No. 04-50708

-2-

aggravated-felony conviction to be charged in the indictment and

proved beyond a reasonable doubt. As Delgado-Ramirez concedes,

this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and Almendarez-Torres was not

overruled by Apprendi. See United States v. Sarmiento-Funes, 374

F.3d 336, 346 (5th Cir. 2004). 

For the first time on appeal, Delgado-Ramirez argues that,

under United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), this court

must vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing because the

mandatory guideline regime was in place at the time of his

sentencing. An unpreserved challenge to the computation of a

defendant’s sentence under the formerly mandatory sentencing

guidelines is reviewed for plain error. United States v. Mares,

402 F.3d 511, 520-21 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed

(Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). 

The district court’s application of the guidelines in their

mandatory form constituted error that is “plain” for purposes of

satisfying the first two prongs of the plain error analysis. See

United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo, 407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir.

2005). Delgado-Ramirez must nevertheless show that the court’s

error affected his substantial rights. Id. To make such a

showing, Delgado-Ramirez bears the burden of demonstrating “that

the sentencing judge--sentencing under an advisory scheme rather

than a mandatory one--would have reached a significantly

different result.” See Mares, 402 F.3d at 521. Delgado-Ramirez
No. 04-50708

-3-

has failed to make such a showing. Accordingly, the judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4715 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the 2006 annual 

coordinated election period for Medicare prescription drug plans through 

August 15, 2006. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2006 

Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire (for himself, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. GOODE, 

and Mr. SCOTT of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to 

the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend 

the 2006 annual coordinated election period for Medicare 

prescription drug plans through August 15, 2006. 

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

3 SECTION 1. THREE-MONTH EXTENSION OF THE 2006 OPEN 

4 ENROLLMENT PERIOD FOR MEDICARE PRE5 SCRIPTION DRUG PLANS. 

6 Section 1860D–1(b)(1)(B)(iii) of the Social Security 

7 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–101(b)(1)(B)(iii)) is amended by 
2 

•HR 4715 IH 

1 inserting ‘‘, except that in applying paragraph (1) of such 

2 section, with respect to the annual coordinated election pe3 riod for 2006, such period shall continue through August 

4 15, 2006’’ before the period. 

Æ
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Michael D. Lohner, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Home
Interiors & Gifts, Inc., (the Company) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge: (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending March 31, 2004
as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (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. Dated: May 13, 2004/s/ MICHAEL D. LOHNERMichael D. LohnerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
No. 11-393.

#### National Federation of Independent Business, et al., Petitioners v. Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. Florida, et al., Petitioners v. Department of Health and Human Services, et al.

No. 11-400.

565 U.S. 1176, 132 S. Ct. 1161,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1015,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 981.

January 23, 2012.

Motion of Freedom Watch for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3493 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3493

    To amend the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 to 
 establish a United States Ambassador at Large for Arctic Affairs, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 26, 2019

 Mr. Sensenbrenner (for himself and Mr. Mast) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 to 
 establish a United States Ambassador at Large for Arctic Affairs, and 
                          for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``United States Ambassador at Large 
for Arctic Affairs Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR AT LARGE FOR ARCTIC AFFAIRS.

    Title I of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 
U.S.C. 2651a et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section:

``SEC. 64. UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR AT LARGE FOR ARCTIC AFFAIRS.

    ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the Department of 
State an Ambassador at Large for Arctic Affairs (referred to in this 
section as the `Ambassador'), appointed in accordance with subsection 
(b).
    ``(b) Appointment.--The Ambassador shall be appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
    ``(c) Duties.--
            ``(1) Diplomatic representation.--Subject to the direction 
        of the President and the Secretary of State, the Ambassador is 
        authorized to represent the United States in matters and cases 
        relevant to Arctic affairs in--
                    ``(A) contacts with foreign governments, 
                intergovernmental organizations, and specialized 
                agencies of the United Nations, the Arctic Council, and 
                other international organizations of which the United 
                States is a member; and
                    ``(B) multilateral conferences and meetings 
                relating to Arctic affairs.
            ``(2) Chair of the arctic council.--The Ambassador shall 
        serve as the Chair of the Arctic Council when the United States 
        holds the Chairmanship of the Arctic Council.
            ``(3) Policies and procedures.--The Ambassador shall 
        coordinate United States Arctic policies.''.
                                 <all>
```
No. 09-8577.

#### German Orlando Lopez, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 996, 130 S. Ct. 1746,

176 L. Ed. 2d 219,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2274.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 348 Fed. Appx. 995.
No. 08-9723.

#### Terrance Moore, Petitioner v. Ohio.

559 U.S. 967, 130 S. Ct. 1685,

176 L. Ed. 2d 176,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2024.

March 1, 2010.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County, for further consideration in light of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305, 129 S. Ct. 2527, 174 L. Ed. 2d 314 (2009).
exhibit10-3_3.htm


Exhibit 10.3.3


AGREEMENT REGARDING GRANTS OF INCENTIVE SHARES AND CLAWBACKS












This Agreement between East West Bancorp, Inc. (“Company”) and the employee referenced below (“Employee”) is entered into as of this 9th day of April, 2012 by and between Company and Employee.







Employee has outstanding stock options, restricted stock and / or restricted stock units of the Company that may vest upon a change in control of the Company.   Employee agrees that no such shares shall vest by reason of a change in control of the Company unless the Employee is terminated or unless Employee’s job is materially changed.  Employee’s job shall be considered materially changed if compensation is reduced, if duties are materially reduced, or if Employee’s principal place of employment is moved more than 25 miles from Pasadena, California.







In addition, Employee agrees that for any existing restricted stock and restricted stock units that Employee currently holds where the vesting is subject to performance metrics, the shares will be subject to “claw back” in event of a restatement of the financial statement on which the shares vesting is based. Employee shall be required to repay the Company the amount of the shares value in excess of what would have been paid based on the restated numbers. The claw back shall be required without regard to the reason for the restatement.







Except as expressly agreed to herein, the Employment Agreement between the parties shall remain in force and effect.







EAST WEST BANCORP, INC.







By: _________________________












____________________________


Employee: Irene Oh
No. 09-461.

#### Stephen Michael West, Petitioner v. Ricky Bell, Warden.

559 U.S. 970, 130 S. Ct. 1687,

176 L. Ed. 2d 180,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2142,

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 550 F.3d 542.
No. 11-6115.

#### Young Bok Song, Petitioner v. James Welch, et al.

565 U.S. 985, 132 S. Ct. 513,

181 L. Ed. 2d 361,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7862.

October 31, 2011.

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

Same case below, 430 Fed. Appx. 213.