alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w04






EXHIBIT 10.04




Summary of Modifications to Annual Incentive Bonus Plan for Fiscal 2009




     On December 1, 2008, the Board approved modifications to the Company’s annual incentive bonus
plan that provides the Company’s executive officers with the opportunity to earn cash bonuses based
upon the achievement of certain performance goals. Performance goals for the first two fiscal
quarters were not modified. Performance goals for the third and fourth fiscal quarters were
changed to: achievement of EPS, inventory reduction, free cash flow and SG&A levels at the company
level and revenue and profit after interest and inventory reduction, as well as the company level
metrics, at the business unit levels, with varying weightings to be determined for different
executive officers. Targets may be set as a quarterly or six month measure and quarterly measures
may allow for recoupment if a target not met in the third quarter is met on a cumulative basis in
the fourth quarter. In addition, the plan was modified to eliminate the annual year over year
component for measuring performance, and performance goals will be based solely on quarterly and/or
six month performance. The modifications also permit providing for a minimum 50% of target payouts
for the third and fourth fiscal quarters.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000596

31-AUG-2018

10:51 AM
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

D.C., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF ANTIOCH, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00719-MEJ 

STATUS ORDER

The Court denied Plaintiffs’ applications to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP 

Applications”). Dkt. No. 8. After Plaintiffs paid the filing fee, the Court directed issuance of 

summons on March 16, 2017. Dkt. No. 9. The Clerk of the Court issued a letter indicating the 

Court had ordered service on defendants (Dkt. No. 10), but because the IFP Applications were 

denied, the Clerk recalled the order of service to the U.S. Marshals (Dkt. No. 12). It does not 

appear Plaintiffs were given notice of the recall. The Court hereby clarifies that, because Plaintiffs 

are not proceeding in formal pauperis, they must ensure the summons, Complaint, and all required 

documentation are served on defendants. The Marshals will not serve defendants. 

This matter is currently scheduled for a Case Management Conference on May 18, 2017. 

However, as there is no indication that Plaintiffs served defendants, the Court VACATES the 

Conference and ORDERS Plaintiffs to file a status report by May 25, 2017 confirming they have, 

or are taking steps to, serve defendants. The Court will reschedule a Conference after all 

defendants have been served and have appeared.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2017

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:17-cv-00719-HSG Document 13 Filed 05/12/17 Page 1 of 1
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Donjel Lamont Walker

, * From the 266th District

Court of Erath County,

Trial Court No. CR13673

.

Vs. No. 11

- 12

- 00 122

- CR * March 21, 2013

The State of Texas, * Opinion by Willson, J.

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Willson , J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no error in

the judgment below. Therefore, in accorda nce with this court ’ s opinion, the judgment of the

trial court is in all things affirmed.
ITEM 6. (A)

                                   EXHIBIT 11

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
              (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT FOR EARNINGS PER SHARE)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                 MARCH  31,
                                            ------------------
                                              1999      1998
                                            --------  --------
<S>                                         <C>       <C>
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  $  5,465  $  6,319
Less:  Preferred stock dividend. . . . . .        42        42
                                            --------  --------
Net income applicable to common stock. . .  $  5,423  $  6,277

Weighted average common shares outstanding   919,835   929,222

Earnings per common share. . . . . . . . .  $   5.89  $   6.80
</TABLE>

<PAGE>
Terrell D. DUBOSE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5195

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 8, 2019 Rehearing Denied June 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
31.1








Certification
Pursuant to Section 302


of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I,
James Hyde, Chief Financial Officer of Great Spirits, Inc., certify
that:





1.   I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB;





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, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this;





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





4.   The
small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-a5(e)) for the small business issuer and
have;





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





(b)  Evaluated
the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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





(c)  Disclosed
in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent
fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial
reporting; and





5.   The
small business issuer other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or person performing the equivalent
functions);





(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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal controls over
financial reporting.





Date:  February
12, 2008




By:
                /s/ James
      HydeJames
      Hyde
                  Chief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2
   1.
    
    Dionex Corporations Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2009,
to which this Certification is attached (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 2.
    
    The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Dionex Corporation.
 By:
    
    /s/ Craig A. McCollamName:
    
    Craig A. McCollamTitle:
    
    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:
    
    February 9, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 20267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10098]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket Nos. RP94-157-004 and RP95-196-002]


Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

April 19, 1995.
    Take notice that on April 13, 1995, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet, to be 
effective April 1, 1995.

Second Revised Sheet No. 453

    Columbia states that the instant filing is being made in compliance 
with the Commission's order issued March 17, 1995, in Docket Nos. RP94-
157, et al. Ordering Paragraph (C) required that within 30 days from 
the date of the order, Columbia make a tariff filing to modify the 
Transportation Costs Recovery Adjustment (TCRA) mechanism as discussed 
in the body of the order. Specifically, the order required Columbia to 
revise its TCRA, on a prospective basis, to require Columbia to include 
its estimate of capacity release revenue when projecting its stranded 
Account Number 858 costs in future TCRA filings. Columbia states that 
Sheet No. 453 revises the language in Section 36.3(1) of its General 
Terms and Conditions (GTC) in accordance with this requirement.
    Columbia states that copies of its filing have been mailed to each 
of its firm customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sec. 385.211 of 
the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed 
on or before April 26, 1995. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this 
filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10098 Filed 4-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Nos. DA 22-0551

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JADE HUNTER KERR,

Defendant and Appellant.

_______________________________________________________________

ORDER

_______________________________________________________________

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including November 4, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve his reply brief on appeal.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 27 2024

09/27/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0551
EDWARDS ANGELL PALMER & DODGE LLP, et al., petitioners, v. Stephen OUWINGA, et al.

No. 12-969.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

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

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RANDOLPH ALLEN,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

Sergeant WARE, Lieutenant MOORE,

Lieutenant D. M. BENEDETTI,

Counselor WILLIAMS, and Appeals

Coordinator W. B. CHILDRESS,

Defendants.. /

No. C 05-1922 WHA (PR) 

ORDER DISMISSING WITH

LEAVE TO AMEND

This is a civil rights case filed pro se by a state prisoner. In the initial review order the

complaint was dismissed with leave to amend because the claims were “jumbled and

conclusory.” He was ordered to amend on the court’s form for prisoner civil rights complaints,

in the hopes that would help him clarify his claims. Plaintiff instead filed a complaint which is

not on the form. It does not identify who is intended to be the defendants nor where they might

be found if service is ordered. It also does not comply with the Court’s order to clearly identify

who is intended to be the defendant on each claim. 

Shortly after filing the amendment plaintiff filed another amended complaint, this time

on the form, but this one does not contain his claims – he simply complains that he is unable to

make copies and that he is unable to go to the law library because the prison is on lockdown. 

Technically, this is presently the operative complaint. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258,

1262 (9th Cir. 1992) (amended complaint completely replaces all previous complaints). 

Case 3:05-cv-01922-WHA Document 13 Filed 08/03/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Plaintiff has not complied with the Court’s order, but in view of his contentions

regarding his inability to go to the law library and his difficulty in amending, he will be

afforded one more opportunity. 

The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend within thirty days from the date this

order is entered, on the Court’s form, stating clearly the basis for each claim as to each

defendant. Plaintiff also must provide sufficient information that service could be obtained if it

is ordered; that is, he must provide as much information as to each defendant as he has, for

instance rank, job position, and institution. 

If plaintiff does not amend within the time allowed, this case will be dismissed without

further leave to amend. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 3 , 2007. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

G:\PRO-SE\WHA\CR.05\ALLEN922.DWLTA2.wpd

Case 3:05-cv-01922-WHA Document 13 Filed 08/03/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

Case 3:05-cv-01922-WHA Document 13 Filed 08/03/07 Page 3 of 3
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Craig A.
McCollam, the Chief Financial Officer of Dionex Corporation (the Company),
hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | 3. |  | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
December 31, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit
32.1 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 4. |  | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By:
    
    /s/ Craig A. McCollamName:
    
    Craig A. McCollamTitle:
    
    Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDated:
AppealOrdered Withdrawn and Opinion issued February 9, 2000

In The

toitrt of Appeals

Jfftftij Btatrtct of Qtexas at Dallas

No. 05-99-02057-CR

No. 05-99-02067-CR

GARY LAWRENCE WHITE, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 292nd District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F98-02694 & F97-47650

OPINION PER CURIAM

Before ChiefJustice Thomas and Justices Kinkeade and O'Neill

Appellant has filed amotion to withdraw the appeal. Appellant's counsel has approved

the motion.

This Court hereby GRANTS the motion and ORDERS the appeal withdrawn and that

this decision be certified below for observance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish

Tex. R. App. P. 47

'ft
Fifth Court of Appeals

Case Attorney Address List

Page: 1

Date Printed: 02/09/2000

Case Number: 05-99-02067-CR Date Filed: 12/08/1999

Style: White, GaryLawrence

v.

The State of Texas

Trial Judge: Wade, Henry Jr.

Trial Court Reporter:

Trial Court: 292ND DISTRICT COURT Trial County: DALLAS

APP JoanneMontagueHurtekant

ATT 010320300

5956 Sherry Lane #1000

Dallas, TX 75225

Phone 214/346-2946

Fax 214/748-8339

STA William T. (Bill) Hill, Jr.

ATT 009669000

ATTN: APPELLATE SECTION

Frank Crowley Courts Bldg., 10th FL

133 N. Industrial Blvd. LB 19

Dallas, TX 75207

Phone 214/653-3845

Fax
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 9 (Friday, January 13, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 3302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1044]





                Sunshine Act Meetings



Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 9 / Friday, January 13, 1995 / 
Sunshine Act Meetings
[[Page 3302]] 




BLACKSTONE RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR COMMISSION

Department of Interior, National Park Service
    Notice is hereby given in accordance with Section 552b of Title 5, 
United States Code, that a meeting of the Blackstone River Valley 
National Heritage Corridor Commission will be held on Thursday, January 
26, 1995.
    The Commission was established pursuant to Public Law 99-647. The 
purpose of the Commission is to assist federal, state and local 
authorities in the development and implementation of an integrated 
resource management plan for those lands and waters within the 
Corridor.
    The meeting will convene at 7:00 pm at Sutton Junior/Senior 
Highschool, Boston Road, Sutton Massachusetts for the following 
reasons:

1. Presentation from Town of Sutton
2. Election of Officers
3. Commission Business
4. Other

    It is anticipated that about twenty people will be able to attend 
the session in addition to the Commission members.
    Interested persons may make oral or written presentations to the 
Commission or file written statements. Such requests should be made 
prior to the meeting to:

James R. Pepper, Executive Director, Blackstone River Valley National 
    Heritage Corridor Commission, One Depot Square, Woonsocket, RI 
    02895, Tel.: (401) 762-0250

    Further information concerning this meeting may be obtained from 
James R. Pepper, Executive Director of the Commission at the 
aforementioned address.
James R. Pepper,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 95-1044 Filed 1-11-95; 2:42 pm]

BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-1-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           470,591
<SECURITIES>                                     305,540
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,072,492
<ALLOWANCES>                                     102,483
<INVENTORY>                                      379,936
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,622,721
<PP&E>                                         1,148,614
<DEPRECIATION>                                   685,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,268,499
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,276,777
<BONDS>                                           41,375
<COMMON>                                              72
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,925,807
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,268,499
<SALES>                                        1,751,383
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,751,383
<CGS>                                            984,665
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,573,412
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   3,879
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 1,242
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  185,366
<INCOME-TAX>                                      59,317
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              126,049
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                     126,049
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0.65
        


</TABLE>
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Gerald C. Stems (State Bar No. 29976) 

STERNS & WALKER 

825 Washington Street, Suite 305 

Oakland, CA 94607 

Telephone: (510) 267-0500 

Facstmile: (510) 267-0506 

Email: stems@trial-law.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOEL W. ADELSON, M.D., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., A 

DOMESTIC CORPORA TON; BRITISH 

AIRWAYS, PLC, A FOREIGN 

CORPORATION, 

Defendants. 

) Case No.: 3:17-cv-00548-WHA 

) 

) 

) Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

)) Extending Time to File Motion to Amend 

) Plaintiff's Complaint 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) _______________________________ ) 

The Parties Stipulate, that due to Plaintiff Adelson's current absence from the United 

States, the complications and difficulties encountered in reaching and effectively communicating 

with Plaintiff Adelson, and subject to Court Approval and Order, that the time specified for 

Plaintiff Adelson to file any Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, may be extended two 

weeks, to Noon on June 15, 2017. 

Ill/ 

/Ill 

/Ill 

I 

Stipulation and (Proposed] Order 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

21 

28 

DATED: liar:~ ~f:fSTERNS & WALKER 

BY -/~G~e=r~al~d~C~.~S~te_rn_s ________ _ 

BY 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

R~ORSYTH LLP 

Michael Cutler 

Attorneys for Defendants 

8Rfit.fl( lrlll'lft5 IlL ( 

A){£1(1CIW ,411&/AE J; We. .. 

PROPOSED ORDER 

Upon Stipulation of Counsel, and Good Cause Appearing Therefore, IT IS SO 

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have up to and including June 15 at Noon to file his Motion to 

Amend. 

Dated: The Honorable Williain Alsup 

United States District Judge 

2 

Stipulation ond (Proposed] Ordc::r 

May 26, 2017.