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


SUMMARY
OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS OF KENNETH T. SMITH


As a
result of his promotion to the position of Chief Financial Officer effective
April 16, 2007 (as further described in the Company’s report on Form 8-K filed
on April 16, 2007), Mr. Smith’s annual salary is $250,000 per year.  His target bonus percentage is 40% of his
annual base salary.  Additionally, Mr.
Smith received (i) 3,793 stock options; (ii) 1,154 performance share rights
awards (“PSRs”) for the fiscal years 2007-2009 performance period; (iii) 545
PSRs for the fiscal years 2006-2008 performance period; and (iv) 161 PSRs for
the fiscal 2007 performance period. 
These stock option and PSR awards are in recognition of his promotion
and are in addition to equity grants previously made to Mr. Smith in his prior
position with the Company.


The
foregoing does not constitute a complete summary of the compensation provided
to Mr. Smith in connection with his promotion to Chief Financial Officer.  Reference is made to the following Company
plans:  (i) Family Dollar Stores, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan (filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 25, 2006);
(ii) Family Dollar Stores, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan 2006
Non-Qualified Stock Option Grant Program (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to
the Company’s Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 25, 2006); (iii) Family
Dollar Stores, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan Guidelines for Long-Term
Incentive Performance Share Rights Awards (filed as Exhibit 10.4 to
the Company’s Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on April 12, 2007); and (iv) the
Cash Bonus Award Guidelines (filed as Exhibit 10 to the Company’s Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on October 6, 2006), for more information regarding Mr.
Smith’s compensation as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company.
NIEUPORT PARTNERS, LLC, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0550

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Communications Plans

Filters

              - multimedia_video(4)
              - multimedia_video-149194(3)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - alaska(4)
              - arizona(3)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(21)
              - colorado(3)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - florida(2)
              - georgia(1)
              - hawaii(2)
              - idaho(3)
              - illinois(1)
              - indiana(1)
              - louisiana(2)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(4)
              - mississippi(1)
              - montana(3)
              - nebraska(3)
              - nevada(2)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new mexico(1)
              - new york(1)
              - north carolina(2)
              - oklahoma(3)
              - (-)oregon(4)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south carolina(3)
              - south dakota(12)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(1)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(1)
              - virginia(2)
              - washington(11)
              - wisconsin(2)
              - wyoming(3)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        June 11, 2019        Tribal Resources for Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments

Presentations and Events        March 11, 2021        Managing Post-Fire, Climate-Induced Vegetation Transitions

Featured Films and Shorts        December 12, 2010        Longitudinal connection and habitat rehabilitation, Tryon Creek, Portland, Oregon

Presentations and Events        September 22, 2022        PubTalk-09/2022 - You Can be Powered by ShakeAlert®️ - Earthquake Early Warning for All!
# C_2020002EN.01000201.xml

| 6.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/2

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9658 — Daiwa Securities Group/Aquila Holding/Aquila Capital Holding)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 2/02)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Daiwa Securities Group Inc. (‘Daiwa’), Japan; |
| --- | --- |

—

Daiwa Securities Group Inc. (‘Daiwa’), Japan;

| — | Aquila Holding GmbH (‘Aquila Holding’), Germany; |
| --- | --- |

—

Aquila Holding GmbH (‘Aquila Holding’), Germany;

| — | Aquila Capital Holding GmbH (‘Aquila Capital’), Germany, controlled by AquilaHolding |
| --- | --- |

—

Aquila Capital Holding GmbH (‘Aquila Capital’), Germany, controlled by AquilaHolding

Daiwa and Aquila Holding acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Aquila Capital.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | Daiwa is a financial services company listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, which provides a broad range of financial services; |
| --- | --- |

—

Daiwa is a financial services company listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, which provides a broad range of financial services;

| — | Aquila Holding is a privately-owned holding company, whose sole purpose is to hold shares in Aquila Capital. Aquila Holding’s shareholders have other controlling investments in different businesses; |
| --- | --- |

—

Aquila Holding is a privately-owned holding company, whose sole purpose is to hold shares in Aquila Capital. Aquila Holding’s shareholders have other controlling investments in different businesses;

| — | Aquila Capital is an asset and investment manager focusing on long-term and sustainable investment solutions. |
| --- | --- |

—

Aquila Capital is an asset and investment manager focusing on long-term and sustainable investment solutions.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9658 — Daiwa Securities Group/Aquila Holding/Aquila Capital Holding

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

| Postal address: |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
## DOT-OST-2013-0073 From: David Kirstein [mailto:Dkirstein@yklaw.com] 

## Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 5:48 PM 

### To: Finamore, Robert (OST) Cc: Joanne Young; Christofano, David (OST) 

## Subject: RE: Aeronexus Docket OST-2013-0073 

## Dear Bob, This isto confirm that given there is no charter annex in the U.S.-South Africa Air TransportAgreementthat it is acceptable to simply receive the authority requested in numbered paragraphs 2 and 3 on page two ofthe Application. With bestregards,

David M. Kirstein Kirstein 

### &Young PLLC 1750 KSt. N.W. Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel: 202.331.3348 ext. 224 Fax: 202.331.3933 email dkirstein@yklaw.com This message is a private communication and is intended only for the named addressee. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or privileged under law. Ifyou are notthe designated recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. Ifyou received this message in error, please notify the senderby reply email and delete this message from your system. Thankyou.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Stephen Linehan, certify that:

 

1.             Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-Kof Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust and Capital One Master Trust (the “ExchangeAct periodic reports”);

 

2.             Basedon my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.             Basedon my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by thisreport is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this reportunder Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.             Allof the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to beincluded in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB andExchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit tothis report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any materialinstances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed inthis report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonablyrelied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: TheBank of New York, First Data Resources, Inc. and REMITCO, LLC.

 

Date: March 25, 2008
|   |   | By:    | /s/ Stephen Linehan                                                                             |
|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Name:  | Stephen Linehan *                                                                               |
|   |   | Title: | President                                                                                       |
|   |   |   | Capital One Funding, LLC                                                                        |
|   |   |   |                                                                                            |
|   |   | *      | Stephen  Linehan is the senior officer in charge of securitization of Capital One Funding, LLC. |
|        |        |        |                                                                                                 |  |  |

 

----
Exhibit 13.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
   Date:    August  31, 2010
    /s/ Daniel Lima de OliveiraDaniel Lima de OliveiraChairman and Chief Executive Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.




---



##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
   Date:     August  31 , 2010
    /s/ Sérvio Túlio da Rosa TinocoSérvio Túlio da Rosa TinocoChief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Simulations of flooding on Tchoutacabouffa River at State Highways 15 and 67 at D'Iberville, Mississippi      

      January 1, 2000    

View Document

A two-dimensional finite-element surface-water model was used to simulate the effects of the proposed State Highways 15 and 67 relocation on water-surface elevations and flow distributions for the 100-year flood on the Tchoutacabouffa River at D'Iberville, Mississippi. The Mississippi Department of Transportation plans to relocate State Highways 15 and 67 by removing a portion of the existing four-lane highway and constructing a four-lane facility upstream of the existing alignment. The proposed alignment is located on the northern floodplain and will tie into the existing highway about 1,000 feet north of the dual State Highways 15 and 67 bridges. The proposed alignment will intercept flows that cross the existing highway during large floods. Seven scenarios were simulated for the 100-year flood, including four proposed alternative configurations for drainage structures. The model grid was developed by using surveyed floodplain cross sections and channel bathymetry data obtained by using an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler, in combination with a global positioning system. The model was calibrated and verified by using surveyed flood profiles through the study reach and flood discharge measurements obtained at the State Highways 15 and 67 crossing. Model parameters were adjusted so that the computed water-surface profiles agreed closely with the surveyed flood profiles. Computed water-surface differentials across the proposed alignment near the northern edge of the floodplain for the four alternatives proposed by the Mississippi Department of Transportation ranged from 1.4 to 2.6 feet. Much lower differentials were computed in the vicinity of the main-channel bridge. The computed water-surface elevation at McCully Drive, upstream of the proposed alignment, was 17.3 feet for existing conditions. Computed water-surface elevations at McCully Drive for the proposed alternatives ranged from 17.3 to 17.8 feet.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Tchoutacabouffa River
                  - mississippi

View All **
Isaac J. HARVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4021

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

August 30, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Samuel B. Steinberg, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

We affirm Appellant's judgment and sentence but remand for correction of a scrivener's error. The Order of Revocation of Probation indicates the trial court found Appellant guilty of each of the alleged violations of probation. However, at the evidentiary hearing, the trial court orally pronounced Appellant was found guilty of willfully violating his probation by violating Condition 5, committing a new law violation, Condition 3, changing residence without permission, and Condition 15, failing to remain confined to his approved residence. The trial court found Appellant not-guilty of violating his probation for failing to pay cost of supervision, nor failing to complete community service. Thus, we affirm the convictions and sentences, but remand to the trial court for correction of the scrivener's error. *See**Cook v. State* , 947 So.2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) ; *Craig v. State* , 245 So.3d 1015 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). Appellant's *419presence at such correction is unnecessary.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED .

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Rowe and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GLENN TIBBLE, as representative of a 

class of similarly situated persons, and on 

behalf of the Plan; et al., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

SCHLICHTER BOGARD & DENTON 

LLP, Class Counsel and Lead Counsel for 

Plaintiffs, 

Appellant, 

 v. 

EDISON INTERNATIONAL; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-55974 

D.C. No. 

2:07-cv-05359-SVW-AGR 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 11, 2019**

Pasadena, California

Before: BOGGS,*** BEA, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 6 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Plaintiffs-Appellants Glenn Tibble et al. (“Appellants”) obtained a damages 

award of $13,161,491 in this class action lawsuit and were awarded an additional 

$5,800,000 in attorneys’ fees. Appellants subsequently filed a motion to deduct 

$964,212 from the class award to reimburse class counsel for expert witness fees.

The district court denied the motion, causing the Appellants to file this appeal. We 

assume familiarity with the facts and procedural history and discuss them only as 

necessary to explain our decision.

We review a denial of fees for an abuse of discretion. Stetson v. Grissom, 

821 F.3d 1157, 1163 (9th Cir. 2016). We must therefore affirm the district court 

unless it applied the wrong legal standard, or its findings were illogical, 

implausible or without support from the record. United States v. Hinkson, 585 

F.3d 1247, 1262 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc).

Here, the district court denied Appellants’ motion because they prevailed on 

only one of ten claims, the district court did not rely on any particular expert’s 

conclusions in reaching its decision on that claim, and the evidence offered in 

support of the motion did not show that any particular expert’s work was “crucial 

or indispensable” to the claim upon which Appellants prevailed. Accordingly, it 

cannot be said that the district court “(1) relie[d] on an improper factor, (2) 

*** The Honorable Danny J. Boggs, United States Circuit Judge for the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
3 

omit[ted] a substantial factor, or (3) commit[ted] a clear error of judgment in 

weighing the correct mix of factors.” Abdullah v. U.S. Sec. Assocs., Inc., 731 F.3d 

952, 956 (9th Cir. 2013). The order of the district court is therefore

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 35.3**

 

**SERVICERCOMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**CAPITALONE MULTI-ASSET EXECUTION TRUST**

**CAPITALONE MASTER TRUST**

 

Capital One Multi-assetExecution Trust

Capital One Master Trust

Capital One Bank (USA),National Association

c/o 140 East Shore Drive

Room 1071-B

Glen Allen, Virginia23060

 

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust andCapital One Master Trust for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007 (the“Report”), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Capital One, NationalAssociation (the “Servicer”), does hereby certify and represent that:

 

1.   A review of the activities and performanceof the Servicer under the Services Agreement dated as of March 16, 2006,by and between Capital One Bank (USA), National Association and the Servicer(the “Agreement”) during the period that is the subject of the Report has beenmade under my supervision.

 

2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreementin all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of theReport.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has duly executed this Servicer Compliance Statement this 25th dayof March 2008.

 

 

**CAPITAL ONE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION**

 

 
| By:    | /s/ Steven Theobald     |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Steven Theobald         |
| Title: | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Case 21-19611-PDR Doc 2 Filed 10/04/21 Page 1 of 4
Case 21-19611-PDR Doc 2 Filed 10/04/21 Page 2 of 4
Case 21-19611-PDR Doc 2 Filed 10/04/21 Page 3 of 4
Case 21-19611-PDR Doc 2 Filed 10/04/21 Page 4 of 4
Ira Dejon DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3059

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed August 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Form of L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. 2008 Long Term Plan



 Exhibit 10.21 
 Performance Unit Award Notice 
  

					
	A. Participant:	  	  
	  	
			
	B. Grant Date:	  	February 22, 2012	  	
			
	C. Performance Period:	  	1/1/2012 through 12/31/2014	  	
			
	D. Aggregate Target Dollar Award:	  	  
	  	
			
	E. Initial Value Per Performance Unit:	  	  
	  	
			
	F. Aggregate Target Performance Units:	  	  
	  	

 G. Performance Measures: 
  

	 	1.	Diluted Earnings per Share: “Diluted EPS” means earnings per common share on a fully diluted basis, determined in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles and as derived from L-3’s audited consolidated financial statements prepared in the ordinary course of business. Diluted EPS shall be adjusted as contemplated by the terms of the Performance Unit Agreement to
exclude certain items specified therein. 

 Portion of Aggregate Target Dollar Award for this Performance Measure:
100% 
 Target Units for this Performance Measure:
                     

Performance Scale: 
  

									
	 Performance Levels
	  	Cumulative
Diluted
EPS Required
	 	  	Unit
Multiplier	 
			
	 Maximum
	  	 	3 $    27.12	  	  	 	200	% 
		  	 	$    26.24	  	  	 	150	% 
	 Target
	  	 	$    25.35	  	  	 	100	% 
		  	 	$    24.46	  	  	 	75	% 
	 Threshold
	  	 	$    23.58	  	  	 	50	% 
	 Below Threshold
	  	<	 $    23.58	  	  	 	0	% 








 In the event that the level of actual performance exceeds the Threshold and falls between
two of the stated performance levels listed above, the Unit Multiplier will be calculated on a straight-line basis between the two stated Unit Multipliers for those performance levels. 

Payment Method: Shares of L-3 stock. Subject to the terms of the Performance Unit Agreement, the number of shares will be determined by
multiplying (1) the Target Units for this Performance Measure, by (2) the applicable Unit Multiplier.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Australia

Filters

              - science_science(1)
              - multimedia_audio(4)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(4)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)
              - multimedia_video(3)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - alaska(15)
              - arizona(1)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(19)
              - colorado(2)
              - florida(10)
              - georgia(2)
              - hawaii(4)
              - illinois(1)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - kansas(3)
              - kentucky(1)
              - louisiana(2)
              - maryland(1)
              - missouri(3)
              - montana(2)
              - nebraska(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new mexico(2)
              - ohio(2)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - (-)south dakota(9)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(2)
              - virginia(1)
              - wisconsin(2)
              - wyoming(2)

## By Year

Podcasts        May 13, 2022        Eyes on Earth Episode 74 – A Satellite Cross Calibration Mission

Podcasts        March 20, 2023        Eyes on Earth Episode 92 – EROS 50th: The Library and Science Support

Podcasts        April 22, 2024        Eyes on Earth Episode 117 – Preparing for Landsat Next, Part 1

Photography        May 12, 2013        Earth as Art 4 - Ord River

Activity        May 26, 2022        Eyes on Earth Episode 74 – A Satellite Cross Calibration Mission

Featured Films and Shorts        December 31, 2018        An Introduction to the AppEEARS Point Sampler

Featured Films and Shorts        December 31, 2012        2012 Earth as Art Top 5

Featured Films and Shorts        April 26, 2021        EarthShots — Satellite Images of Environmental Change

Podcasts        October 6, 2022        Eyes on Earth Episode 81 - Tour of the EROS Radome