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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-65,366] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 25, 2009 in response to a petition filed by the California State TAA Coordinator on behalf of the workers at Hewlett Packard Company, Business Critical Systems—Mission Critical Business Software Division, Open VMS Operating System Development Group, Marlborough, Massachusetts, including employees working off-site in New Hampshire, Florida, New Jersey, and Colorado. 

The petition regarding the investigation has been deemed invalid. State representatives can only submit petitions on behalf of workers previously employed in their respective states. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of March 2009. 

Richard Church 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9-6305 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Harleysville Group Inc


EXHIBIT (10)(W)




Non-Employee Director Compensation




		
	

Type of Compensation

	

Amount


	Annual Retainer

	$35,000


	Additional Monthly Retainer for Non-Employee Chairman (1)

	$  8,333


	Board Attendance Fee per Meeting

	$  2,000


	Committee Attendance Fee per Meeting (2)

	$1,000/$2,000


	Annual Retainer for Committee Chair (2)

	$8,000/$12,000/ $16,000


	Deferred Stock Units (3)

	$50,000


	Other Compensation

	(4)







______________




(1)

Effective April 1, 2010, the additional monthly retainer for the non-executive Chairman will be decreased to $6,250.




(2)

The chair of the Audit Committee and the chair of the Compensation and Personnel Development Committee receive an annual retainer of $16,000 and $12,000, respectively; the chairs of the other committees receive an annual retainer of $8,000. The Committee meeting fees for the Audit Committee are $2,000 per meeting and for all other Committees are $1,000 per meeting.




(3)

Each non-employee director continuing to serve on the Board of Directors of the Registrant after each annual meeting of stockholders receives an automatic grant of Deferred Stock Units under the Directors’ Deferred Stock Unit Plan equal to a value of $50,000 on the date of grant.  A Deferred Stock Unit is the right to receive, without payment to the Company, one share of common stock of the Company.  The Deferred Stock Units have a dividend equivalent feature, which provides for payment of cash dividends when and if cash dividends are paid on the outstanding common stock.




(4)

Directors are reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses.  A non-employee director who serves on both the Harleysville Group and Harleysville Mutual boards receives only one retainer and, if the boards or the same committees of Harleysville Group and Harleysville Mutual meet on the same day, the non-employee director receives only one attendance fee.  In either situation, the retainer or attendance fee is allocated equally to Harleysville Group and Harleysville Mutual.
EXHIBIT 10.1

December 7, 2007

Jay Caldwell
Chief Financial Officer
Redhook Ale Brewery, Inc.
14300 NE 145th Street
Woodinville, WA  98072

Dear Jay:

     The purpose of this letter is to confirm our understanding about your
continued employment as the Chief Financial Officer of Redhook Ale Brewery,
Incorporated (the "Company").

     Our mutual agreement regarding your salary, severance and other benefits,
beginning now is set forth below.

Compensation and Benefits
-------------------------

     You will receive a base salary of $180,000.00 per year, subject to review
by the Compensation Committee and approval by the Board. In addition, you are
entitled to participate in all of the Company's employee benefit programs for
which you are eligible.

     You will be eligible for a yearly bonus, such bonus to be approved by the
Board on the recommendation of the Compensation Committee. The potential bonus
is 20% of your base salary. Your base salary is to be paid retro-actively from
October 1, 2007.

Severance
---------

     In the event that your employment with the Company is terminated by the
Company for any reason other than "for cause", you will be entitled to severance
equal to twelve months salary, plus accrued vacation and sick pay.

     I am acting on behalf of the Company having reviewed the minutes of the
Compensation Committee meeting dated November 7, 2007 and the Board meeting
dated November 13, 2007.


<PAGE>

     It is our intention that you remain on the payroll until June 30, 2008 in
connection with the Merger. (unless terminated earlier) At the end of your
employment on June 30, 2008 the Company will pay your twelve months severance,
subject to you signing a release. In the event that the Company requires ongoing
assistance, the Company will pay you $20,000.00 per month.

     Upon termination not-for-cause you will be offered Company paid COBRA
coverage for up to one year or until you find new employment with comparable
health care coverage. The release will include a non-competition component for
employment in the beer business for six months post employment.

     We appreciate your continued efforts on behalf of Redhook, and look forward
to having you as a member of our team through the merger and integration
process.

Acknowledged and Agreed:



/s/ Paul S. Shipman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Shipman



December 10, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date

Acknowledged and Agreed:



/s/ Jay T. Caldwell
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay Caldwell



December 10, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,157]

In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 6, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a Tennessee AFL-CIO Technical Assistance Program representative on behalf of workers of Alcoa, Inc., Alcoa, Tennessee.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 17th day of March 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-6527 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
In the INTEREST OF O.B.D.,

No. ED 107234

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Filed: June 18, 2019

George E. Tillman, 1843 Sherman Dr., St. Charles, MO 63303, For Appellant.

Charlene E. Stockman, 1700 S. River Rd., St. Charles, MO 63303, For Respondent.

Trisha E. McCulloch, 814 1st Capitol Dr., St. Charles, MO 63301-2732, For Juveniles.

Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

R.D. ("Mother") appeals the trial court's judgment terminating her parental rights to her minor children, O.B.D., A.R.D., L.A.D., J.M.D., and A.R.G., pursuant to § 211.447. Mother raises six points on appeal. Finding that the trial court did not err as to the matters of which Mother complains, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Sheila A. WALLIS, Appellant.

WD 80817

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: JUNE 4, 2019

Shaun Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Stephen M. Patton, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Before Division Three: Thomas H. Newton, Presiding Judge, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge, Edward R. Ardini, Jr., Judge

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

Sheila Wallis appeals her conviction for one count of first degree stalking, Section 565.225, RSMo Cum. Supp. 2008, second or subsequent offense. We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5506 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5506

    To preclude the acceptance of a driver's license as a document 
     establishing identity, for purposes of employment eligibility 
    verification, if the State issuing the license permits use of a 
 taxpayer identification number that is not a social security account 
                   number in the application process.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 25, 2006

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To preclude the acceptance of a driver's license as a document 
     establishing identity, for purposes of employment eligibility 
    verification, if the State issuing the license permits use of a 
 taxpayer identification number that is not a social security account 
                   number in the application process.

    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 ``State Accountability in Licensing 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PRECLUDING USE OF TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS IN DRIVER'S 
              LICENSE ISSUANCE.

    Section 274A(b)(1)(D)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1324a(b)(1)(D)(i)) is amended by striking ``section;'' and 
inserting ``section, except that if a State permits an applicant for 
the license or document to use a taxpayer identification number that is 
not a social security account number in the application process, the 
license or document may not be used to verify employment eligibility 
under this section;''.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Roderick D. ELLIS, Appellant.

WD 80389

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: December 26, 2018

Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, and Richard A. Starnes, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Matthew C. Hans and Allison A. Schaper, St. Louis, MO, Attorneys for Appellant.

Before Division Four: Karen King Mitchell, Chief Judge, and Victor C. Howard and Lisa White Hardwick, Judges

**Order**

Per Curiam:

Roderick Ellis appeals, following a jury trial, his convictions of kidnapping, § 565.110, first-degree domestic assault, § 565.072, first-degree assault of a law enforcement officer, § 565.081, and two counts of armed criminal action, § 571.015, for which he was sentenced to a total of thirty years' imprisonment. Ellis raises two claims on appeal. First, he argues that the prosecutor made an allegedly improper statement during closing argument. Second, Ellis argues that the State should not have been allowed to present testimony from eight witnesses who were endorsed approximately two weeks before trial. Finding no error, plain or otherwise, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
**Exhibit 31.2**

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. SECTION 7241, AS ADOPTED 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE 

SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002 

I, Michael A. Gerlich, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Gastar Exploration, Ltd. (the “Registrant”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theRegistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 

5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’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 Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 15, 2007
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. John Graham HEADLEY, Appellant.

WD 80994

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Filed: January 29, 2019

Steven B. Willibey, Kansas City for appellant.

Garrick F. D. Aplin, Jefferson City for respondent.

Before Division Three: Mark D. Pfeiffer, Presiding Judge, Lisa White Hardwick and Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judges

**ORDER**

Per Curiam

John Headley appeals his convictions and sentences for first-degree statutory sodomy and incest. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. Upon review of the briefs and the *268record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose.

AFFIRMED. Rule 30.25(b).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7823
JAMES A.G. BUNCH, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK, Secretary; BOYD BENNETT, Director; RANDALL LEE; ROBERT SMITH; ERNEST SUTTON; UNKNOWN SUPERINTENDENT, Central Prison; UNKNOWN SUPERINTENDENT, Nash Correctional Inst itution; UNKNOWN SUPERINTENDENT, Pender Correc tional Institution; UNKNOWN SUPERINTENDENT, Wayne Correctional Instit ution; UNKNOWN SUPERINTENDENT, Marion Correctional Institution; LAWRENCE SOLOMON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-741-5-BO) Submitted: July 21, 2004 Decided: August 4, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James A.G. Bunch, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.- 2 - Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 3 - PER CURIAM: James A.G. Bunch, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. SeeBunch v. Beck , No. CA-03- 741-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 8, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 31.1**Certification of Principal Executive OfficerI, Peter A. Edison, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bakers Footwear Group, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [reserved](c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        June 19, 2007 /s/ Peter A. Edison   Peter A. Edison   Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive OfficerBakers Footwear Group, Inc.(Principal Executive Officer)
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 Annual Report of Bomps Mining, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending August 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kris Ertz, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
25th day of November, 2009.


/s/ Kris Ertz
------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the annual report of TK Star Design, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas P. Kinney, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify 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 Company.  Dated: August 4, 2010By: /s/ Thomas P. KinneyChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
In the INTEREST OF: M.K.M.

Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. M.K.M., Appellant.

WD 81792

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: July 16, 2019

Lori Fluegel, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Respondent.

Craig A. Johnston, Assistant State Public Defender, Columbia, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Before Division Two: Thomas N. Chapman, Presiding Judge, and Mark D. Pfeiffer and Cynthia L. Martin, Judges

**Order**

Per Curiam:

M.K.M. ("Juvenile") appeals from the order of adjudication of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, Family Court Division, finding that the Juvenile Officer proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Juvenile committed acts that would constitute the felony of sodomy in the first degree if committed by an adult. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum of law has been provided to the parties. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).