alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv4w4






Exhibit 4.4




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED RIGHTS AGREEMENT




     THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED RIGHTS AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is dated as
of January 22, 2009, and is made among BIOGEN IDEC INC., a Delaware corporation (f/k/a Idec
Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the “Company”), and MELLON INVESTOR SERVICES LLC, a New Jersey limited
liability company, as Rights Agent (f/k/a ChaseMellon Shareholder Services, LLC, the “Rights
Agent”), with reference to the following facts:



     A. The Company and the Rights Agent entered into that certain Amended and Restated Rights
Agreement (the “Rights Agreement”), dated as of July 26, 2001, and further amended as of June 20,
2003. Capitalized terms used without definition herein have the meanings ascribed to such terms in
the Rights Agreement.



     B. Pursuant to Section 27 of the Rights Agreement, the Company may from time to time
supplement or amend the Rights Agreement at any time prior to a Distribution Date (which has not
yet occurred);



     NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Rights Agent hereby agree as follows:



     1. Final Expiration Date. Section 7(a) of the Rights Agreement is hereby amended to replace
the date July 26, 2011 with January 30, 2009, so that the defined term “Final Expiration Date”
shall mean January 30, 2009.



     2. Conforming Changes. The Exhibits to the Rights Agreement shall be restated to reflect
this Amendment, including all conforming changes.



     3. Effectiveness. This Amendment shall be deemed effective as of the date first set forth
above, as if executed and delivered on such date. Except as amended hereby, the Rights Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect and otherwise be unaffected hereby.



     4. Governing Law. The Amendment shall be deemed to be a contract made under the laws of the
State of Delaware and for all purposes shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
laws of such state applicable to contracts to be made and to be performed entirely within such
state.



     5. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed
an original, and all of which together shall constitute one instrument.



 









 





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment is executed as of the date first set forth above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	THE COMPANY:

	 	THE RIGHTS AGENT:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	BIOGEN IDEC INC.,

	 	MELLON INVESTOR SERVICES LLC,	 	 
	a Delaware corporation

	 	a New Jersey limited liability company	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By: /s/ Paul J. Clancy
 


	 	By: /s/ Mark Cano
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Name: Paul J. Clancy

	 	Name: Mark Cano	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Title: Chief Financial Officer

	 	Title: Relationship Manager
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10298]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 675

[Docket No. 950206040-5040-01; I.D. 042195C]

Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area; Trawl 
Pacific Cod Fishery

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the directed fishery for Pacific cod by 
vessels using trawl gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 
management area (BSAI). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding 
the first seasonal apportionment of the 1995 prohibited species bycatch 
mortality allowance of Pacific halibut specified for the trawl Pacific 
cod fishery in the BSAI.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), April 24, 1995, 
until 12 noon, A.l.t., October 25, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew N. Smoker, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive 
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management 
Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 
Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council 
under authority of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed by regulations implementing 
the FMP at 50 CFR parts 620 and 675.
    The first seasonal bycatch mortality allowance of Pacific halibut 
for the BSAI trawl Pacific cod fishery, which is defined at 
Sec. 675.21(b)(1)(iii)(E), was established as 1,450 metric tons by the 
final 1995 specifications of groundfish (60 FR 8479, February 14, 
1995).
    The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined, in accordance 
with Sec. 675.21(c)(1)(iii), that the first seasonal apportionment of 
the Pacific halibut bycatch mortality allowance for the trawl Pacific 
cod fishery has been caught. Therefore, NMFS is prohibiting directed 
fishing for Pacific cod by vessels using trawl gear in the BSAI.
    Directed fishing standards for applicable gear types may be found 
in the regulations at Sec. 675.20(h).

Classification

    This action is taken under Sec. 675.21 and is exempt from review 
under E.O. 12866.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: April 21, 1995.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-10298 Filed 4-24-95; 9:16 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
```
Geoffrey Peter SCHARDIEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-8967.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Offer Letter - Kathy Brooks



 Exhibit 10.1 
 March 13, 2001 
 Ms. Kathryn S. Brooks 
 10 Serena Lane 
 New Milford, CT 06776 
 Dear Kathy,

 We are pleased to offer you the position of Vice President, Human Resources and Organizational Development of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters. You will
report directly to me and be responsible for leading the transformation of the organization and the other functions described in the attached Position Specifications. Your compensation will include a base salary of $140,000 per annum, reviewed on an
annual basis, and a target annual bonus of 15% based on performance. In addition, pending Board approval, you will receive 20,000 stock options at the market value on your first day of employment. The stock options vest over 5 years at 20% a year.
This offer is contingent upon the successful completion of reference checks. 
 In addition to your salary and bonus opportunity, you shall be entitled to
participate in the Company’s medical, dental and disability insurance benefit programs and the benefits under the Company’s 401(k) plan on your first day of employment. You will also be entitled to a term life insurance policy. You shall
be entitled to 20 days paid vacation per year. 
 Green Mountain Coffee Roasters will reimburse you for the reasonable and customary moving expense incurred
in moving your household to Vermont, including temporary housing. While your relocation plan may be further customized based on your individual needs, a schedule of benefits is attached. 
 We anticipate that your start date will be on or before April 16, 2001. Should your employment be terminated for any reason other than cause, including change of control, you would be given 12 months severance,
paid in accordance with the normal payroll periods. 
 Kathy, I so look forward to working with you and am pleased you will be joining the team of Green
Mountain Coffee Roasters. Please sign this letter to signify your acceptance and return it to me. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ Robert Stiller
	Chairman, President and CEO

 I confirm my acceptance of your offer letter of appointment as Vice President, Human Resources and Organizational
Development on the terms set out above. 
  

					
			
	/s/ Kathryn S. Brooks	 		 	March 18, 2001
1

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

The Law Offices of John L. Burris

7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120

Oakland, California 94621

Telephone: (510) 839-5200

JOHN L. BURRIS, Esq. SBN 69888

ADANTÉ D. POINTER Esq. SBN 236229

MELISSA C. NOLD, Esq. SBN 301378

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS

Airport Corporate Centre

7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120

Oakland, California 94621

Telephone: (510) 839-5200

Facsimile: (510) 839-3882 

john.burris@johnburrislaw.com

adante.pointer@johnburrislaw.com 

lateef.gray@johnburrislaw.com

melissa.nold@johnburrislaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRANDON SIMPSON,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al.

 Defendants.

Case: 17-00133 KAW

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

UNOPPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS 

CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM FOR 

PLAINTIFF’S PRESENCE AT 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

Settlement Conf: June 27, 2017

Hon: Laurel Beeler

Time of Delivery: 9:15 a.m.

TO: Alameda County Sheriff’s Department

Litigation Division

1401 Lakeside Drive

Oakland, California 94612 

Alameda County Sheriff’s Department

Santa Rita Jail - Transportation Division

5325 Broder Blvd

Dublin, CA 94568

Case 4:17-cv-00133-KAW Document 35 Filed 06/20/17 Page 1 of 2
2

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

The Law Offices of John L. Burris

7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120

Oakland, California 94621

Telephone: (510) 839-5200

The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

Ad Testificandum for Brandon Simpson, hereby GRANTS the motion. 

The Court hereby issues a Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum to secure the 

appearance of BRANDON SIMPSON, PFN BFI303, at the Settlement Conference in this 

matter on June 27, 2017, beginning at 10:00 a.m., before the Honorable Laurel Beeler, United 

States Magistrate Judge, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Courtroom C, Fifteenth Floor, San 

Francisco, CA 94102. 

The Court further orders that Plaintiff shall pay the usual and customary charges of the 

Alameda County Sherriff’s Department for the transportation and custody of Mr. Simpson for 

the settlement conference, and that Plaintiff may seek reimbursement of all expenses from 

Defendants should he prevail in this matter. 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 19, 2017 _____________________________________

Honorable Judge Laurel Beeler

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:17-cv-00133-KAW Document 35 Filed 06/20/17 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1

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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal American Corp. (the "Registrant") for the quarter
ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Richard A. Barasch, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Robert A.
Waegelein, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of his knowledge:



Date: April 28, 2011

/s/ RICHARD A. BARASCHRichard A. Barasch Chief Executive OfficerDate: April 28, 2011

/s/ ROBERT A. WAEGELEINRobert A. Waegelein Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that Section. This certification is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in
such filing.

---



QuickLinks
Anthony GASTON, aka Tony, petitioner, v. Anthony HEDGPETH, Warden.

No. 12-8909.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### Frederick W. PONCZEK, Appellant, v. PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP.

No. 03-2105.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) May 11, 2004.

Decided May 17, 2004.

Jerome J. Kaharick, Jerome J. Kaharick & Associates, Johnstown, PA, for Appellant.

Robert W. Cameron, Kenneth C. Kurtz, Pittsburgh, PA, for Appellee.

Before NYGAARD, MCKEE, and WEIS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff was 58 years of age when he applied for employment with the defendant company in January 2001. Twenty employees were selected from the group of applicants at that time, including six who were 40 years of age or older. Plaintiff alleges that he was not hired as a result of age discrimination.

In accordance with the defendant’s hiring process, plaintiff completed an application and passed a written test. He was then interviewed by two management personnel who questioned him on such matters as relevant work experience, problem solving, learning new tasks, and whether he could engage in continuous lifting of 40-50 pounds. The interviewer rated plaintiffs responses as “low,” a failing grade.

After exhausting his administrative remedies, plaintiff filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, alleging that defendant violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621, *et seq.*The District Court employed the familiar *846burden-shifting procedure outlined in *McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green,*411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973), and concluded that defendant had articulated a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for failing to hire plaintiff and that plaintiff then failed to show pretext. Accordingly, the court entered summary judgment for defendant.

On appeal, plaintiff contends that the District Court improperly resolved a material issue of controverted fact by failing to view the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. He relies on the affidavit of his 22-year-old son Jason, who applied at the same time and who was hired. We observe, however, that the affidavit establishes nothing other than the fact that a younger individual, capable of continuously lifting products weighing 40-50 pounds from an assembly line during a working day, was a good candidate for employment. In contrast, plaintiff was dubious during his interview as to whether he could engage in continuous lifting of 40-50 pounds.

The District Court did not err in concluding that the plaintiffs evidence failed to discredit the defendant’s proffered reasons for failing to hire him. We have reviewed the District Court’s thorough opinion and, essentially for the reasons stated there, conclude that the summary judgment must be affirmed.
Roy COMBS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-8152.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Amanda BROWN, Appellant, v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, Christopher Brown and Covington Park of Winter Garden Owners Association, Appellees.

Case No. 5D18-1084

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed May 21, 2019 Rehearing Denied July 11, 2019

Amanda Brown, Winter Garden, pro se.

Roy A. Diaz, of SHD Legal Group, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellee, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB.

No Appearance for other Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

*693AFFIRMED. *See**IndyMac Federal Bank FSB v. Hagan*, 104 So.3d 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).

BERGER, LAMBERT and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
# L_2018098EN.01002001.xml

| 18.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 98/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 98/20

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2018/586

of 12 April 2018

appointing a member, proposed by the Republic of Austria, of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Austrian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 20 June 2017, by Council Decision (EU) 2017/1121 (4), Mr Christian BUCHMANN was re-appointed as a member. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 20 June 2017, by Council Decision (EU) 2017/1121 (4), Mr Christian BUCHMANN was re-appointed as a member.

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Christian BUCHMANN, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Christian BUCHMANN,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Ms Barbara EIBINGER-MIEDL, Landesrätin in der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ms Barbara EIBINGER-MIEDL, Landesrätin in der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 12 April 2018.

For the Council

The President

T. DONCHEV

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

(4)  Council Decision (EU) 2017/1121 of 20 June 2017 appointing a member, proposed by the Republic of Austria (OJ L 162, 23.6.2017, p. 54).

4

---
May 19, 1986

No. 85-777.

#### National Federation of Federal Employees *v.*Defense Language Institute.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari dismissed under this Court’s Rule 53.
10-Q











Exhibit 10.2  




Dear ___________ 



On ____________, 2008, you entered
into an agreement with Pluristem Therapeutics Inc. (the “Company”) pursuant
to which you were issued a warrant to purchase up to an _____________ shares of Common
Stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share exercisable for a period of 5 years (the
“Warrant”) and were given the option to purchase an additional _________ shares
of Common Stock at a purchase price of $0.75 per share, and receive therewith warrants to
purchase up to an additional _________ shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of
$1.50 per share, by giving notice to the Company no later than 10 business days
(“Notice Period”) following the release of an official announcement by the
Company that it is initiating its first human clinical trials (the “Option”). 




This is to confirm that you have
agreed that the Warrant and the Option will not be exercisable until May _, 2009. It is
agreed that in the event that the Company’s announcement that it is initiating its
first human clinical trials comes before May _, 2009, then the Notice Period will commence
on May _, 2009. 






If you agree to the content of this
letter, please so indicate by signing and returning a copy of this letter to me  
  



Your sincerely, 




Yaky Yanay, CFO



Agreed and Accepted by
Tramaine Mondale BEADLES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9508.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT
32.2








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




















In connection
with the Annual Report of First Guaranty Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michele
E. LoBianco, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that to the best of
my knowledge:





(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/ Michele E.
LoBianco


Michele
E. LoBianco


Chief
Financial Officer


Secretary
and Treasurer


(Principal
Financial & Accounting Officer)


March 31,
2009
Jorge Alberto GARCIA, petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General.

No. 11-79.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case *2020remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Moncrieffe v. Holder,* --- U.S. ----, 133 S.Ct. 1678, --- L.Ed. ---- (2013).
Michael Alexander ROBINSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9587.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA



### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

In the Interest of Z.N., J.S., J.R. and J.S. , children.

G.S

. ,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES and

GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM

,

Appellees

.

No. 2D 2 023

- 2083

May 22 , 202 4

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Lisa D.

Campbell

, Judge.

Constance Daniels, Brandon , for Appellant.

Mary Soorus of Children's Legal Services, Tampa , for Appellee

Department of Children and Families.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Amanda

Victoria Glass , Senior Attorney, Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Office,

Tallahassee, for Appellee Guardian ad Litem.

PER CURIAM

.

Affirmed.

### 2

SILBERMAN

, LaROSE

, and SMITH , JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.