alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.36  


 
 

AMENDMENT
  TO THE MACERICH COMPANY
  2003 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN    
    



        WHEREAS, The Macerich Company (the "Company") maintains The Macerich Company 2003 Equity Incentive Plan (the
"Plan"); 


        WHEREAS, Article 8 of the Plan provides for the automatic formulaic award of nonqualified stock options to eligible directors of
the Company during the term of the Plan; and 


        WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has the authority to amend the Plan, and has determined that it is advisable and in the best interests of
the stockholders of the Company to amend the Plan to suspend the grant of such automatic awards indefinitely. 


        RESOLVED, the Plan is hereby amended effective as of October 29, 2003 as follows: 


        1.     Section 8.1
of the Plan is hereby amended by inserting the following sentence to the immediately before the first sentence thereof: 


        "Notwithstanding
anything contained in this Article 8 to the contrary, effective as of October 29, 2003, the automatic grant of nonqualified stock options as provided for
in this Section 8 is hereby suspended." 


        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused its duly authorized officer to confirm the adoption of this Amendment by the Board as of the
29th day of October, 2003. 



	 	 	/s/  RICHARD A. BAYER      
 Richard A. Bayer

Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary











QuickLinks


AMENDMENT TO THE MACERICH COMPANY 2003 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN
null

976.2834
Edwin SANTOS-MARTINEZ, aka Chinito, aka Chino, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9664.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Exhibit
      99.3





Annual
      Administrator’s Certificate








Standard
      & Poor’s Ratings Services


55
      Water
      Street


New
      York,
      New York 10041


Attention:
      Asset-Backed Surveillance Group





Fitch
      Ratings


One
      State
      Street Plaza


New
      York,
      New York 10004


Attention:
      Structured Finance





Moody’s
      Investors Service Inc.


99
      Church
      Street


New
      York,
      New York 10007


Attention:
      Structured Finance





Wachovia
      Bank, National Association


401
      South
      Tryon Street


Charlotte,
      North Carolina 28288


Attention:
      Structured Finance Trust Services





SLC
      Student Loan Trust 2005-3


c/o
      Wilmington Trust Company


Rodney
      Square North, 1100 North Market Street


Wilmington,
      Delaware 19890-0001


Attention:
      Corporate Trust Administration





As
      an
      officer of The Student Loan Corporation, the Administrator of SLC Student Loan
      Trust 2005-3


(the
      Administrator) pursuant to a certain Administration Agreement dated as of
      December 15, 2005 between the SLC Student Loan Trust 2005-3 and The Student
      Loan
      Corporation (the Administration Agreement), I hereby certify that:





(a)
            a
                review of the activities of the Administrator during the preceding
                calendar year and of its performance under the Administration Agreement
                has been made under my supervision,
                and




(b)
            to
                the best of my knowledge, based on such a review, the Administrator
                has
                fulfilled all of its obligations under the Administration
                Agreement for the period December 15, 2005 through December
                31, 2005, and there have been no known defaults in the fulfillment
                of such
                obligations.











/s/
      Daniel P. McHugh     March
      31, 2006


Daniel
      P.
      McHugh        Date


Chief
      Financial Officer


The
      Student Loan Corporation, as Administrator
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1460 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, as the ‘‘Captain Mark 

Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 5, 2005 

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia (for himself, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Mrs. 

DRAKE, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. FORBES, Mr. GOODE, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. BOUCHER, and Mr. 

WOLF) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, 

as the ‘‘Captain Mark Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CAPTAIN MARK STUBENHOFER POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 6200 Rolling Road in Spring-
2 

•HR 1460 IH 

1 field, Virginia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cap2 tain Mark Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Captain Mark 

7 Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

Æ
Exhibit 99.1
                                 ------------

                                      11
<PAGE>

COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWMBS, INC.
                    CHL MORTGAGE PASS THROUGH TRUST 2001-32
              MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2001-32


     The undersigned do hereby certify that they are each an officer of
Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, LP (the "Master Servicer") and do hereby
further certify pursuant to Section 3.16 of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement for the above-captioned Series (the "Agreement") that:

     (i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the
     preceding calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer
     under the Agreement has been made under our supervision; and

     (ii) To the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master
     Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement
     throughout such year.




/s/ Thomas K. McLaughlin                             Dated: March 25, 2002

THOMAS K. MCLAUGHLIN
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



/s/ David A. Spector                                 Dated: March 25, 2002

DAVID A. SPECTOR
MANAGING DIRECTOR



                                      12
Exhibit 99.2
Annual Servicer's Certificate
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services55 Water StreetNew York, New York 10041Attention: Asset-Backed Surveillance Group
Fitch RatingsOne State Street PlazaNew York, New York 10004Attention:  Structured Finance
Moody's Investors Service Inc.99 Church StreetNew York, New York 10007Attention:  Structured Finance
Wachovia Bank, National Association401 South Tryon Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28288Attention: Structured Finance Trust Services
SLC Student Loan Trust 2004-1c/o Wilmington Trust CompanyRodney Square North, 1100 North Market StreetWilmington, Delaware 19890-0001Attention:  Corporate Trust Administration
 As an officer of The Student Loan Corporation, the Master Servicer of SLC Student LoanTrust 2004-1, I hereby certify that: (a)a review of the activities of the Servicer during the preceding calendar year and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision, and (b)to the best of my knowledge, based on such a review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement throughout the period ended December 31, 2004, and there have been no known defaults in the fulfillment of such obligations.   
/s/ Daniel P. McHugh                                                                             March 31, 2005   Daniel P. McHugh                                                                                         DateChief Financial OfficerThe Student Loan Corporation, as Servicer
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1734 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1734

 To suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal Device (LCD) panel 
           assemblies for use in LCD direct view televisions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 20, 2005

 Ms. Hart (for herself and Mr. Murphy) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal Device (LCD) panel 
           assemblies for use in LCD direct view televisions.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.90.14      Liquid Crystal      Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Device (LCD)                                                       31/2008
                         panel assemblies
                         for use in LCD
                         direct view
                         televisions
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         9013.80.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1513 

To exempt from the Freedom of Information Act certain photographic images 

of deceased persons that are taken by or for medical examiners. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2005 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Government Reform 

A BILL 

To exempt from the Freedom of Information Act certain 

photographic images of deceased persons that are taken 

by or for medical examiners. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FROM THE FREEDOM OF INFOR4 MATION ACT OF CERTAIN PHOTOGRAPHIC 

5 IMAGES OF DECEASED PERSONS TAKEN BY 

6 OR FOR MEDICAL EXAMINERS. 

7 Section 552(b) of title 5, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) in paragraph (8), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the 

10 end; 
2 

•HR 1513 IH 

1 (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period and 

2 inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

3 (3) by inserting after paragraph (9) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(10) copies, reproductions, or facsimiles of any 

6 photograph, negative, or print, including instant 

7 photographs and videotapes, of the body, or any por8 tion of the body, of a deceased person, taken by or 

9 for a medical examiner at the scene of the person’s 

10 death or in the course of a post mortem examination 

11 or autopsy of the person made by or caused to be 

12 made by a medical examiner.’’. 

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1460 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1460

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, as the ``Captain Mark 
                  Stubenhofer Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2005

Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia (for himself, Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, 
     Mrs. Drake, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Goode, Mr. 
  Goodlatte, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Boucher, and Mr. 
    Wolf) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, as the ``Captain Mark 
                  Stubenhofer Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CAPTAIN MARK STUBENHOFER POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Captain Mark Stubenhofer Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Captain 
Mark Stubenhofer Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 1:15-cr-00010-TLS-SLC

)

DEWAYNE LEWIS )

OPINION AND ORDER

Defendant Dewayne Lewis has filed a supplemental post-hearing reply brief regarding the

consolidated motion to dismiss the indictment and other evidentiary hearing issues (DE 260),

along with attached exhibits (DE 260-1). The government has moved to strike the exhibits Lewis

attached to his supplemental post-hearing reply brief. (DE 261). As grounds for the motion to

strike, the government states that many of the exhibits were filed in the public record in violation

of a protective order previously entered by the Court. Additionally, the government states that

none of these exhibits were admitted into evidence during the evidentiary hearings. 

The Court conducted a two-day evidentiary hearing regarding the consolidated motion to

dismiss the indictment and other evidentiary hearing issues on February 9-10, 2016. (DE 110;

DE 111). During the hearing, the Court heard testimony and received evidentiary exhibits

submitted by the parties. (DE 112). On January 27, 2017, the Court held a supplemental

evidentiary hearing, after Lewis requested that the Court hold a supplemental hearing in order to

permit him to introduce newly obtained evidence. (DE 252). At the supplemental evidentiary

hearing, the Court heard additional testimony and received additional evidentiary exhibits

submitted by the parties. (DE 254). 

The purpose of an evidentiary hearing is for the parties to present the Court with the

necessary evidence to make a ruling on a matter in dispute between the parties. “[T]he district
court has wide discretion in deciding whether to allow a party to reopen proofs after the close of

evidence.” Kafka v. Truck Ins. Exch., 19 F.3d 383, 389 (7th Cir. 1994) (citations omitted). Here,

the Court has already reopened the evidence to permit Lewis to present supplemental testimony

and evidentiary exhibits. The Court will not consider any exhibits attached to post-hearing

briefing, because such exhibits were not admitted into evidence during the evidentiary hearings. 

Accordingly, the government’s motion to strike (DE 261) is GRANTED. When ruling on

Lewis’s consolidated motion to dismiss the indictment and other evidentiary issues, the Court

will consider only those items properly admitted into evidence during the evidentiary hearings. 

The exhibits to Lewis’s supplemental post-hearing reply brief (DE 260-1) will be STRICKEN

from the record. Given that these exhibits contain information regarding confidential informants,

and the documents were improperly filed in the public record in violation of the protective order,

the Clerk is DIRECTED to ensure that the exhibits are removed from public access. 

SO ORDERED.

Entered this 11th day of April 2017.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins,

United States Magistrate Judge

2
Skip to main content
          Skip to FDA Search
          Skip to in this section menu
          Skip to footer links


U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government

					Here’s how you know
          			Dot gov**The .gov means it’s official.**Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
							      SSL**The site is secure.** The **https://** ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. 
			U.S. Food and Drug Administration
				
        Search
            Menu
							
						Search FDA
									
									Submit search 
		Featured
							Contact FDA
	                FDA Guidance Documents
	                Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts
	                Press Announcements
	                Warning Letters
	                Advisory Committees
	                En Español

					Products
            Food
							Drugs
							Medical Devices
							Radiation-Emitting Products
							Vaccines, Blood, and Biologics
							Animal and Veterinary
							Cosmetics
							Tobacco ProductsTopics
            About FDA
							Combination Products
							Regulatory Information
							Safety
							Emergency Preparedness
							International Programs
							News and Events
							Training and Continuing Education
							Inspections and Compliance
							Science and ResearchInformation For
            Consumers
	            Patients
	            Industry
	            Health Professionals
	            Federal, State and Local Officials 
 In this section:

                Consumers (Biologics)

Consumers (Biologics) Home
          Vaccines, Blood & Biologics
          Resources for You (Biologics)
          Consumers (Biologics)
          Science for ConsumersConsumers (Biologics) Science for Consumers
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintScience & Research for Consumers

Asthma: The Hygiene Hypothesis
	Ronald Rabin, MDResources For You

Biologics Research Projects
	For Consumers

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      03/23/2018Consumers (Biologics)
 
 Footer Links
    FDA Archive
          About FDA
          Accessibility
      Visitor Information
          Website Policies / Privacy
          No FEAR Act
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
      FOIA
          HHS.gov
          USA.gov
    Contact FDA
      Follow FDA on Facebook
      Follow FDA on X
      Follow FDA on Instagram
      Follow FDA on LinkedIn
      View FDA videos on YouTube
      Subscribe to FDA RSS feeds
    FDA Homepage
    Contact Number
      1-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332) Back toTop
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12841]



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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Larry Reginold Dean, et al.; Change in Bank Control Notices; 
Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. Once the notices have been accepted for 
processing, they will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later 
than June 8, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Zane R. Kelley, Vice President) 
104 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303:
    1. Larry Reginold Dean, Lake Park, Georgia; to retain 10.96 percent 
of the voting shares of VB&T Bancshares Corporation, Valdosta, Georgia, 
and thereby indirectly acquire Valdosta Bank & Trust Company, Valdosta, 
Georgia.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (James A. Bluemle, Vice 
President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690:
    1. William A. Moore, Huxley, Iowa; to acquire an additional 76.5 
percent for a total of 100 percent of the voting shares of Huxley 
Bancorp, Huxley, Iowa, and thereby indirectly acquire First State Bank, 
Huxley, Iowa.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 19, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-12841 Filed 5-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
possibility t

enhance ris

vide market 

exposure.

Given the p

changes in 

take on add

has a numb

trends, and 

develop new 

Finally, if ris

monitor as 

implications 

cy question 

many of the resulting bank failures will come from institutions that

did not pay insurance premiums at year-end 1999. The question

will then be how many of those premium misclassifications were the

result of what one might call random errors – the price we willingly

accepted for not having an overly burdensome regulatory and

supervisory structure – and how many were the result of systematically subsidizing certain types of riskier institutions at the expense of

other members of the system.

When we consider the more than 9,500 insured institutions that all

paid no premium at year-end 1999, there clearly were some systematic factors that distinguished their risk profiles. The distinction

between banks with composite examination ratings of 1 and 2 is

one example, but there may be others. For example, should new

banks or fast growing banks pay additional premiums, both for reasons of risk differentiation and to force them to pay for the external

18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

v. ) No. 2:15 CR 104

)

AUSTIN LAMPLEY. )

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY AND

 ADJUDICATION

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge (DE # 20), to which the defendant has waived objection, and subject to this

court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(c)(3), the

Magistrate Judge’s findings are now ADOPTED, defendant’s plea of guilty to the

offense charged in Count one of the Indictment is now hereby ACCEPTED, and

defendant is adjudged guilty of that offense. A sentencing date will be set under

separate order.

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 9, 2016

s/James T. Moody 

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT