alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.36

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                       SANTA FE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

                  1997 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN

WHEREAS the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Santa Fe
International Corporation ("Board") having been expressly authorized by the
Board has, effective November 22, 1999, authorized and approved an amendment of
the definition of "Change of Control" contained within the Santa Fe
International Corporation 1997 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan ("Plan")
to address a "merger of equals" transaction; and

WHEREAS, Section 4.7 of the Plan authorizes the Board in this instance to amend
the Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Santa Fe International Corporation 1997 Non-Employee
Director Stock Option Plan, which was adopted effective June 13, 1997, is hereby
amended effective November 22, 1999 as follows:

1.   A new Subparagraph (vi) of Section 3.7 (a) "Change of Control" thereof is
     ADDED to the Plan to read as follows:

         (vi) there is consummated a `merger of equals' (which for purposes of
         this Subsection shall mean a merger with another company or relatively
         equal size) to which the Company is a party as a result of which the
         persons who were equityholders of the Company immediately prior to the
         effective date of such merger shall have beneficial ownership of less
         than 55% of the combined voting power for election of members of the
         Board (or equivalent) of the surviving entity or its parent following
         the effective date of such merger, provided that the Board shall have
         authority to increase said percentage as may in its sole discretion be
         deemed appropriate to cover a specific transaction.


Dated:  December 1, 1999



By: /s/ Cary A. Moomjian
    --------------------------------------------
    Santa Fe International Corporation
Cody Dewayne WOOD v. STATE

CR-16-0672

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

Affirmed.
Case 4:05-cv-00046-A Document 14 Filed 06/23/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 60
 

 Case 4:05-cv-00046-A Document 14 Filed 06/23/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 61
Ronnie MENDOZA, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Thomas M. KNIGHT, Sheriff, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1397

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 24, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is transferred to the Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court for Sarasota County.

MORRIS, BLACK, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 845 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 845

To amend title 5, United States Code, to protect Federal employees from 
   retaliation for the lawful use of Federal records, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 18, 2021

   Mr. Leahy introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to protect Federal employees from 
   retaliation for the lawful use of Federal records, 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 ``Federal Employee Access to 
Information Act''.

SEC. 2. PROTECTIONS AGAINST RETALIATION FOR LAWFUL USE OF FEDERAL 
              RECORDS BY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

    (a) Protection Against Retaliation.--Section 2302(b)(9) of title 5, 
United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end;
            (2) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``or'' after the 
        semicolon; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(E) the employee or applicant for employment--
                            ``(i) making a request for information 
                        pursuant to section 552 (commonly referred to 
                        as the `Freedom of Information Act') or 
                        subsection (d) of section 552a (commonly 
                        referred to as the `Privacy Act of 1974'); or
                            ``(ii) pursuing any administrative or 
                        judicial action with respect to such request, 
                        including seeking assistance or to engage in 
                        dispute resolution, as described in section 
                        552;''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Title 5.--Sections 1214, 1215(a)(3)(B), 1221, 2302, and 
        7703 of title 5, United States Code, are amended by striking 
        ``or (D)'' in each instance and inserting ``(D), or (E)''.
            (2) Whistleblower protection enhancement act of 2012.--
        Section 116(b)(1)(A) of the Whistleblower Protection 
        Enhancement Act of 2012 (31 U.S.C. 1116 note) is amended by 
        striking ``or (D)'' and inserting ``(D), or (E)''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 8 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 8

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Homeland 
 Security relating to ``Increase of the Automatic Extension Period of 
   Employment Authorization and Documentation for Certain Employment 
              Authorization Document Renewal Applicants''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2025

   Mr. Kennedy (for himself and Mr. Scott of Florida) introduced the 
 following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Homeland 
 Security relating to ``Increase of the Automatic Extension Period of 
   Employment Authorization and Documentation for Certain Employment 
              Authorization Document Renewal Applicants''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Department of Homeland Security relating to 
``Increase of the Automatic Extension Period of Employment 
Authorization and Documentation for Certain Employment Authorization 
Document Renewal Applicants''(89 Fed. Reg. 101208 (December 13, 2024)), 
and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
William Clay TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-990

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Order - Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MICHAEL DANTE GARRETT §

 §

 Petitioner, §

§

v. § CIVIL ACTION NO.

§ 3:04-CV-957-P

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director §

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, §

Correctional Institutions Division, §

§

Respondent. §

ORDER

This is a writ of habeas corpus case filed by a state inmate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

The Magistrate Judge filed her Findings and Conclusions on September 29, 2006. Respondent

filed objections on October 3, 2006 objecting to the magistrate judge’s failure to rule on his

defense that this petition is time-barred. The magistrate judge made no ruling on the timeliness

of the petition but instead proceeded directly to the merits of the claims. Petitioner filed no

objections to the magistrate judge’s report, nor did he file a response to respondent’s objections. 

After review of the file, the magistrate judge’s report, and respondent’s objections, the

court overrules respondent’s objections. The issue of whether a habeas petition is time-barred is

not a jurisdictional issue, but rather is a defense. Davis v. Johnson, 158 F.3d 806,811 (5 Cir. th

1998). Respondent cites no authority which requires that limitations defenses be resolved ahead

 

 Case 3:04-cv-00957-P Document 24 Filed 10/16/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 117
 Respondent states he is filing the objections to preserve the issue for appeal. However, the magistrate 1

judge made no findings, conclusions or recommendations regarding the limitations issue. Thus, this court treats

respondent’s objections as objecting to the magistrate judge’s failure to rule on the limitations defense.

Order - Page 2

of other issues. Hence, the court finds no error on the part of the magistrate judge in deciding

the claims on the merits rather than deciding the timeliness issue. 

1

After reviewing all the relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings,

Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and respondent’s objections, the

court accepts the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and

adopts them as the findings of this court.

Signed this 16 day of October 2006. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-00957-P Document 24 Filed 10/16/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 118
Exhibit 32.01

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

In connection with the KMG America Corporation
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, 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 KMG America Corporation.

A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to KMG America Corporation and will be retained by KMG America Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

|                       |  |                                               | 
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------- | 
|Date:   August 9, 2007 |  | /s/   Kenneth U. Kuk                         
|                       | 
|                       |  | Kenneth U. Kuk                               
|                       |  | Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer
|                       |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                

---
Maurice N. CAVER v. STATE

CR-16-0608

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

July 28, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
STATE of Louisiana v. Mario LEDET

NO. 2018-KH-1134

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 29, 2019

Denied.
# C_2017318EN.01000901.xml

| 25.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/9

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (United Kingdom) made on 17 July 2017 — Dermod Patrick O'Brien v Ministry of Justice (Formerly the Department for Constitutional Affairs)

(Case C-432/17)

(2017/C 318/14)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dermod Patrick O'Brien

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministry of Justice (Formerly the Department for Constitutional Affairs)

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

Does Directive 97/81 (1), and in particular clause 4 of the Framework Agreement annexed thereto concerning the principle of nondiscrimination, require that periods of service prior to the deadline for transposing the Directive should be taken into account when calculating the amount of the retirement pension of a part-time worker, if they would be taken into account when calculating the pension of a comparable full-time worker?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Annex: Framework agreement on part-time work (OJ 1998, L 14, p. 9)

1

---
Case 2:03-cv-00421-J Document 287 Filed 09/14/06 Page 1 of 4 PageID 3435
Case 2:03-cv-00421-J Document 287 Filed 09/14/06 Page 2 of 4 PageID 3436
Case 2:03-cv-00421-J Document 287 Filed 09/14/06 Page 3 of 4 PageID 3437
Case 2:03-cv-00421-J Document 287 Filed 09/14/06 Page 4 of 4 PageID 3438
#### E. M. Gollnick and Anna E. Gollnick, His Wife, *Appellants,*v. Walter James, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Opinion Filed January 9, 1928.

*C. P. Diamond,*Attorney for Appellants;

*James T. Vocelle,*Attorney for Appellee.

*1232Buford, J.

This is an appeal from order overruling a general demurrer to an amended bill of complaint in a suit in which the complainant in the court below sought to recover the sum of $1,000.00 paid under an executory contract to purchase certain lands from the defendants in the court below, and to have decreed a lien on the property embraced in the contract. It was alleged that a breach of the contract had occurred on the part of the defendants by reason of the failure of the vendors, who were the defendants in the court below, to comply with that condition of the contract contained in the following language:

“The seller is to furnish an abstract showing his title to be good and merchantable, but in the event that the title shall not be found good and merchantable, the seller agrees to use reasonable diligence to make the said title good and merchantable, and shall have a reasonable time so to do, and if after reasonable diligence on his part said title shall not be made good and merchantable within a reasonable time, the seller may, at his option, return the money this day paid and all moneys that may have been paid to him under this contract, and thereupon he shall be released from all obligations hereunder. ’ ’

The order overruling the demurrer should be affirmed on authority of the opinions in the cases of Barclay v. Bank of Osceola County, 82 Fla. 72, 89 Sou. 357; Musselwhite v. Olson, 60 Fla. 342, 53 Sou. 944, and Wheeler v. Sullivan, 90 Fla. 711, 106 Sou. 876, and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, J., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1203-1204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00051]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 7, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby

[[Page 1204]]

gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 30, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1225 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1034, K2025-1033.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00051 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
***CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED***

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

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                                                                                                                             |   |   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Mark                Klein                                                                                                                                                                               |   |   |   |
| Name: Mark                KleinTitle:   Chief                Executive Office, President and Director(Principal                Executive Officer) Date:                August 20, 2007  |   |   |   |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                             |   |   |   |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                             |   |   |   |
| /s/ Deborah                A. Gargiulo                                                                                                                                                                      |   |   |   |
| Name: Deborah                A. GargiuloTitle:   Chief                Financial Officer(Principal                Financial and Accounting Officer) Date:                August 20, 2007 |   |   |   |

----
Eric Lamont COLEMAN v. STATE

CR-16-0936

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
David Wayne DOWNS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3625

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-3 (Nos. 333-84826 and 333-99693) and on Form S-8 (Nos.
333-59218, 333-64389, 333-78317, 333-64300, 333-103752 and 333-120393)
of L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report
dated March 15, 2005 relating to the financial statements,
management's assessments of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP New York, New York
March 15, 2005

---
Ladarryl PETTWAY v. STATE

CR-16-0904

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3820-3821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00766]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: AC25-44-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC submits request for 
approval of accounting treatment for deferred taxes associated with 
sale and purchase re a transaction with Global Infrastructure Partners, 
LP on 10/04/2023.
    Filed Date: 1/8/25.
    Accession Number: 20250108-5096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/29/25.

    Docket Numbers: AC25-45-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC submits request for 
approval of accounting treatment for deferred taxes associated with 
sale and purchase re a transaction with Global Infrastructure Partners, 
LP on 10/04/2023.
    Filed Date: 1/8/25.
    Accession Number: 20250108-5097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/29/25.

    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a 
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with 
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the 
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is 
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system 
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/

[[Page 3821]]

fercgensearch.asp) by querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports 
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission 
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, 
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access 
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For 
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as 
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is 
encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or [email protected].

    Dated: January 8, 2025.
Carlos D. Clay,
Acting Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-00766 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```