alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.28

 

EARTHLINK, INC.

 

Board of Directors Compensation Plan

 

Effective January 2011

 

1.               Retainers

 

a.               Each independent director receives a $70,000 annual retainer.

b.              The Lead Director receives an additional $20,000 annual retainer.

c.               The Audit Committee chair and the Leadership and Compensation Committee chair each receive an additional $20,000 annual retainer.

d.              The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee chair receives an additional $10,000 annual retainer.

e.               All retainers are paid annually in advance, following the annual shareholder meeting in May.

 

2.               Restricted Stock Units

 

a.               Independent Directors receive a grant of RSUs valued at $80,000 on the first business day immediately following the annual shareholder meeting in May.

b.              RSUs will vest after one year, and not later than the next annual shareholder meeting, provided the director is serving as an independent director at that time.

 

i.      Note:  Each RSU is equal to one share of EarthLink stock.  Upon vesting, the RSUs may be received in shares of stock (in which case the recipient has taxable income equal to the value of the shares received on the date of vesting).

 

3.               Meeting Expenses

 

a.               EarthLink reimburses directors for their expenses incurred in attending Board of Directors and Committee meetings.

 

4.               Education Expenses

 

a.               EarthLink will pay reasonable program fees and associated travel expenses for each director to participate in one or more additional relevant director education programs.  In selecting director education programs, directors should consider general Board governance and specific Committee focus.
STATE EX REL. UTILITIES COMMISSION v. ATTORNEY GENERAL

401A18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 7, 2019

Jennifer T. Harrod, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Matthew W. Sawchak, Solicitor General, Teresa L. Townsend, Assistant Attorney General, Margaret A. Force, Assistant Attorney General, James W. Doggett, Deputy Solicitor General, Matt Burke, Solicitor General Fellow, for Stein, Josh (Attorney General).

Kiran H. Mehta, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Christopher G. Browning, Jr., Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Molly McIntosh Jagannathan, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

Matthew D. Quinn, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Bridget M. Lee, Attorney at Law, Dorothy E. Jaffe, Attorney at Law, Pro Hac Vice, Pro Hac Vice, for Sierra Club.

Peter H. Ledford, Attorney at Law, Benjamin Smith, Regulatory Counsel, for N.C. Sustainable Energy Association.

Gudrun Thompson, Attorney at Law, David L. Neal, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Justice Center, et al.

David T. Drooz, Chief Counsel, Lucy E. Edmondson, Staff Attorney, Chris Ayers, Staff Attorney, Layla Cummings, Staff Attorney, Megan Jost, Staff Attorney, Nadia Luhr, Staff Attorney, for N.C. Utilities Commission-Public Staff.

From N.C. Utilities Commission (E-7,SUB1110 E-7,SUB1146); From Wake (E-7, Sub 1110)

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of May 2019 by Attorney General to Amend Appendix to Brief:

*692"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of May 2019."
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 March 3, 2015

s0223

Order 

Clerk

March 3, 2015

149306

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 149306

COA: 319863

Wayne CC: 12-011536-FC

DEMARCO LAMONT HENDERSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 28, 2014 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### In the Matter of Parkway Village Equities Corporation, Appellant, v Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

[720 NYS2d 6]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, to vacate a resolution of respondent Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York dated February 15, 2000, which reversed a determination of additional respondent Department of Buildings of the City of New York revoking building permits issued to additional respondent Bahar Group, L. L. C., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The authority charged with enforcing New York City Zoning Resolution § 12-10 is respondent Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA), and since the questions raised concerning the application of that Zoning Resolution related to BSA’s expertise, the court properly accorded the BSA’s interpretation of the relevant subdivisions of Zoning Resolution § 12-10 (Zoning Lot, subds [a], [d]) “great weight and judicial deference,” such interpretation having been “neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statute” *(Matter of Trump-Equitable Fifth Ave. Co. v Gliedman,*62 NY2d 539, 545; *accord, Matter of Toys “R” Us v Silva,*89 NY2d 411, 418-419).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 25, 2011 

p0418 

Order 

 

April 25, 2011 

142262 

SELECT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142262 

 COA: 293143 

Oakland CC: 2007-082927-CH 

LASALLE GROUP, INC., and TRAVELERS 

CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF 

AMERICA, 

 Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

SCOTT NEMECEK, WAL-MART STORES, 

INC., GRAND/SAKWA ADAMS PARCEL I, 

L.L.C., and WELLS FARGO BANK 

NORTHWEST, N.A., 

 Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 2, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5347 

To reauthorize the HOPE VI program for revitalization of public housing 

projects. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 10, 2006 

Mr. SHAYS (for himself, Ms. WATERS, Mr. LEACH, Mr. WATT, Mr. DAVIS of 

Alabama, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. FORD, Mr. WEXLER, Mrs. 

CHRISTENSEN, Mr. EVANS, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. BOEHLERT, Mr. SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. OWENS, Mr. MEEKS of New York, Mr. 

PAYNE, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. MILLER of North Carolina, Mr. COOPER, 

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr. UPTON, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. CONYERS, and Mr. HOLT) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the HOPE VI program for revitalization of 

public housing projects. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘HOPE VI Reauthor5 ization Act of 2006’’. 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5347 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROGRAM. 

2 Section 24 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 

3 (42 U.S.C. 1437v) is amended— 

4 (1) in subsection (m)(1), by striking ‘‘fiscal 

5 year 2003’’ and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal years 2007 

6 through 2011’’; and 

7 (2) in subsection (o), by striking ‘‘September 

8 30, 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2011’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
No. 09-9278.

#### Oscar Rhodes, Petitioner v. William Lee, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.

559 U.S. 1077, 130 S. Ct. 2112,

176 L. Ed. 2d 739,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3351.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
# C_2017385EN.01000201.xml

| 15.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8586 — TPC/JSR/UMG/UBE/MR)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 385/02)

On 10 November 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8586. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8586. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE
PERIOD DECEMBER 31, 1996
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         936,081
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  543,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,479,331
<PP&E>                                      16,577,611
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,867,857
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,189,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,189,085
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,189,085
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,036,698
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,014,502
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,084,193
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
STATE v. Napier Sandford FULLER

378P18-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2019

Napier Sandford Fuller, for Fuller, Napier Sandford.

Peter A. Regulski, Mary Carla Babb, Assistant Attorney Generals, Blake M. Courlang, District Attorney, James R. Woodall, Jr., District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of March 2019 by Defendant for Notice and Request for Disability Accommodations to Ensure Due Process:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of June 2019."
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JESUS LANDAVAZO-AGUNDEZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10262

D.C. No. 4:11-cr-02214-JGZ

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Linda R. Reade, District Judge, Presiding**

Submitted June 18, 2013***

Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Jesus Landavazo-Agundez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 60-month sentence for possession with

FILED

JUN 21 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge of the United States

District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation. 

*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and

(b)(1)(A)(ii)(II). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

Landavazo-Agundez’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for

relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided

Landavazo-Agundez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se

supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 

Landavazo-Agundez has waived his right to appeal his conviction and

sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See

United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly

dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

2 12-10262
STATE of North Carolina v. Travis KINGSBERRY

No. 86P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2019

Kimberly P. Hoppin, Attorney at Law, For Kingsberry, Travis

John P. Barkley, Assistant Attorney General, For State of North Carolina

Michael D. Waters, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 13th of March 2019 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 13th of March 2019 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2019."
BOBBY JINDAL GOVERNOR STEPHEN CHUSTZ SE C RETAHY

October 15,2014

## ~tate 

# of JLoutstana
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT ( J ·:_; (, 1) ·-< V ) ---; r · ,**:- ~**  Vl 

## "**~.0** 

### ...... -l' a rn ('"") .,.J :t.>.:::O**~** -:u rr! N

- n w Plp ., C)- 0 ""0 

### -<

- -I**~r,-,** rrJ :JC (" ) Barbara Keeler EPA Region 6 --; N

....... Marine and Coastal Section 1445 Ross Ave. Dallas, TX 75202-2733
RE: C20140225, Coastal Zone Consistency United States Environmental Protection Agency Direct Federal Action Request for exception to Bayou Aux Carpes §404(c) 1985 Final Determination Jefferson Parish, Louisiana
Dear Ms. Keeler: n c..n ( :C .&:- : .

This office has received the above referenced negative consistency determination, in accordance with Section 307(c)

. of**th~** . Federal Coastal

_ Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. After careful re_view we have determined that the project does not demonstrate any reasonably foreseeable effects on coastal uses or resources. Therefore we concur with your negative determination, as described by NOAA regulations on federal consistency at 15 CFR §930.35. Please refer to the above Consistency number when corresponding on this matter. If you have any questions please call Jeff Harris of the Consistency Section at (225) 342-7949

.

D n ayd Acting Administrator Interagency Affairs/Field Services Division DH/jdh

cc: David Butler , LDWF Martin Mayer, COE-NOD Jason Smith, Jefferson Parish Frank Cole, IA/FSD
Pos t Office Box 44487 • Baton Ro u ge, Lo ui sian a 7 080 4-4487 61 7 North Third Stree t • lOt h Floor • Suite 1078 • Baton Ro u ge , Lo u is ian a 7 0 8 0 2 ( 225 ) 342-759 1 • Fax ( 225) 342-9439 • h ttp://www

.dnr.l o ui si an a.gov A n Eq u a l Opportu n ity Emp loye r



### . . ... . 0
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

June 24, 2014

s0616 

# Order

Clerk June 24, 2014

148478

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148478

COA: 318108

Kent CC: 10

- 005462

- FC

MARQUISE LESJUAN HARRIS

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 15

, 2013

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).
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Fund, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
the Report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Funds disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the period covered by the Report based on such
evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in the Report any change in the Funds internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Funds most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Funds internal
control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the Funds ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the Funds internal control over financial reporting.
 By: /s/Nigel JamesNigel JamesPresident and Principal Executive OfficerAugust 14, 2007
 E-2
EXHIBIT 32(b)

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      The undersigned, being the Chief Financial Officer of Jordan Industries,
Inc., an Illinois corporation (the "Registrant"), hereby certifies that the
Annual Report on Form 10-K (the "Annual Report") of the Registrant for the year
ended December 31, 2004, which accompanies this certification, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. ss.78m(a)) and that the information contained in the Annual Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.

Date: March 24, 2005

/s/ Norman R. Bates
---------------------------------------
Norman R. Bates
Chief Financial Officer, Vice President
and Assistant Secretary
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005
(the "Report") of Quadriga Superfund, L.P. (the "Fund") I, Christian Baha,
President and Chief Executive Officer of Superfund Capital Management, Inc., the
general partner of (Quadriga Superfund, L.P. (the "Fund"), 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 results of operations
          of the Fund.


                                       By: /s/ Christian Baha
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Christian Baha
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                                           August 11, 2005


                                       E-4
No. 09-8665.

#### Loi N. Nghiem, Petitioner v. John Kerestes, District Attorney, County of Delaware, Pennsylvania, et al.

559 U.S. 1014, 130 S. Ct. 1899,

176 L. Ed. 2d 377,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2669,

March 22, 2010.

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