alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Senior Officers Long-term Incentive Plan, Amendment No. 1



 Exhibit 10(xiv) 
 Nucor Corporation 
 2003 Form 10-K 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
  
 NUCOR CORPORATION SENIOR OFFICERS 
 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 
  
 THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Nucor Corporation Senior Officers
Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is made and adopted on February 25, 2004 by NUCOR CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”). 
  
 RECITALS 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company has adopted the Plan; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to provide that fractional shares of stock shall not be included in any Restricted Stock Performance Award
under the Plan; and 
  
 WHEREAS, in Section 5.1 of the Plan, the
Company, by action of the Board of Directors, reserved the right to amend the Plan; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has taken action authorizing and approving the amendments to the Plan provided herein. 
  
 NOW THEREFORE, the Company does hereby declare that Section 4.2 of the Plan is amended by deleting the third sentence
thereof in its entirety and by substituting the following two sentences in lieu thereof: 
  
 The remaining fifty percent (50%) of the shares comprising the Eligible Employee’s Performance Award shall be rounded down to the next lower whole number of shares. Such whole number of shares shall constitute
the Eligible Employee’s “Restricted Stock Performance Award” and shall be delivered to the Eligible Employee, unless the Eligible Employee makes an election in accordance with Section 4.3 to defer payment of the Restricted
Stock Performance Award. 
  
 Except as expressly or by necessary
implication amended by this Amendment No. 1, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment No. 1 to be executed as of the day and year first above written. 
  

			
	 NUCOR CORPORATION

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Terry S. Lisenby

	 	 	

	 Name:
	 	 Terry S. Lisenby

	 Title:
	 	 Executive Vice President,
 Treasurer and Chief Financial
 Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alan Beaver Laverte WAY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-6455.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Alan Beaver Laverte Way, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart A. Berman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland; Barbara Slaymaker Sale, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alan Beaver Laverte Way seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. *975We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Way has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certifícate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
```

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 133 (Thursday, July 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37319-37320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15095]

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

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:

    Docket Numbers: RP21-958-000.
    Applicants: NRG Power Marketing LLC, Middletown Power LLC, 
Generation Bridge Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Joint Petition for Limited Waiver of Capacity Release 
Regulations, et al. of NRG Power Marketing LLC, et al. under RP21-958.
    Filed Date: 7/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210706-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/19/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-959-000.
    Applicants: NRG Power Marketing LLC, Direct Energy Business 
Marketing, LLC, Generation Bridge Acquisition, LLC.
    Description: Joint Petition for Limited Waiver of Capacity Release 
Regulations, et al. of NRG Power Marketing LLC, et al. under RP21-959.
    Filed Date: 7/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210706-5156.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/19/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system 
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying 
the docket number.

[[Page 37320]]

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) 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.
    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.

    Dated: July 9, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-15095 Filed 7-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
Exhibit 32.1





Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Christopher V. Vitale, the Principal Executive Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.





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





Dated:  May 16, 2011

/s/  Christopher V. VitaleChristopher V. VitaleChief Administrative Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
**Exhibit 32**

AMANASU TECHNO HOLDINGS**Certification of President and Principal Financial Officer			Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,			As Adopted Pursuant to			Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

			Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of the			registrant certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the registrant's Annual			Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 (the "Form 10-K")			fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities			Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-K,			fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results			of operations of the registrant.		

 Dated: June 20, 2011
			 By: /s/ Atsushi Maki					Atsushi Maki					Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, & Chief Financial Officer
#### COMMERCIAL BANK, Respondent, v. FOLTZ, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 6, 1898.)

Action by the Commercial Bank against Moses Foltz, impleaded, etc.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. See 41 N. Y. Supp. 183.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Amy E. Miles, certify that:

 

1.                        I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 of Regal Entertainment Group;

 

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 report; and

 

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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

 
| Date:   March 25, 2015 | /s/ AMY   E. MILES         |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                        | Amy   E. Miles                  |
|                        | *Chief Executive Officer*       |
|                        | *(Principal Executive Officer)* |

 

----
# C_2020077EN.01001902.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/19

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 4 November 2019 — Flightright GmbH v Qatar Airways

(Case C-810/19)

(2020/C 77/29)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Flightright GmbH

Defendant: Qatar Airways

Questions referred

| 1. | Is there a ‘directly connecting flight’ within the meaning of Article 2(h) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) also where, in the case of flights comprising a single booking, which provide for a stopover at a connecting airport outside the territory of the European Union, a longer stay at the stopover location is planned and the onward flight booked is not the next possible available flight? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is there a ‘directly connecting flight’ within the meaning of Article 2(h) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) also where, in the case of flights comprising a single booking, which provide for a stopover at a connecting airport outside the territory of the European Union, a longer stay at the stopover location is planned and the onward flight booked is not the next possible available flight?

| 2. | In the event that the first question is answered in the negative: | Must Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 be interpreted as meaning that that regulation also applies to passenger transport by a flight which is not operated from an airport located in the territory of a Member State but forms part of single booking which also includes a flight from an airport located in the territory of a Member State, even if that former flight is not a directly connecting flight? |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

In the event that the first question is answered in the negative:

Must Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 be interpreted as meaning that that regulation also applies to passenger transport by a flight which is not operated from an airport located in the territory of a Member State but forms part of single booking which also includes a flight from an airport located in the territory of a Member State, even if that former flight is not a directly connecting flight?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Vascular Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, James Hennen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 the Company.
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                                                 |  |                    |  | 
| | ----------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------ |  | 
| |                                                 |  | /s/   James Hennen | 
| |                                                
| | James HennenChief Financial OfficerMay 10, 2004 | 

---
exhibit-4_29.htm




 



 



 



Page - 1







 




 



 



Page - 2







 



 

 



 



 



Page - 3







 



 



 



 



Page - 4







 



 



 



 



Page - 5







 



 



 



 



Page - 6







 




 



 



Page - 7
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to  Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Joel Boyarski, the Principal Financial Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007, which this certification accompanies, fully
complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the September 30, 2007
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

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

Dated:
November 9, 2007

| | /s/JOEL BOYARSKIJoel Boyarski Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
#### In re BOARD OF RAPID TRANSIT. In the matter of the application of the board of rapid transit for appointment of commissioners.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 18, 1898.)

PER CURIAM.

Although the present commission did not sit as long as the commission appointed upon the last previous application, yet their labors seem to have been practically as great. In view of this fact, and in view, also, of the curtailment of their ordinary summer vacation, we think it reasonable to grant the present commissioners the same amount as was awarded to their immediate predecessors, to wit, $2,000 each. See 39 N. Y. Supp. 750, 1121; 45 N. Y. Supp. 1134; 49 N. Y. Supp. 60; and 50 N. Y. Supp. 306.
#### TAYLOR, Respondent, v. KREISCHER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Action by Francis B. Taylor, as receiver, etc., against Stephen, N. Kreischer.

No opinion. Judgment of the County Court of Nassau county affirmed by default, with costs.
Exhibit
32.2
 
 Certification Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
 Section 906 of
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 I, Joel Boyarski, the Principal
Financial Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate
Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009, which this
certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.
 
 A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will be
retained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
 
 Dated:
      May 15, 2009
                /s/  Joel
      BoyarskiJoel
      BoyarskiChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)
#### Marvin BLUNT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Kuma J. DEBOO, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 11-6158.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 26, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 10, 2011.

*789Marvin Blunt, Appellant pro se. Rita R. Valdrini, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Marvin Blunt, a District of Columbia Code offender, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2011) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certifícate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Blunt has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         876,033
<SECURITIES>                                    22,425
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,565
<ALLOWANCES>                                    49,749
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,070,927
<PP&E>                                          83,300
<DEPRECIATION>                                  21,237
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,256,494
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          408,731
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            72
<OTHER-SE>                                     716,549
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,256,494
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                98,171
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,479
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                37,893
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   4
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,795
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,099
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,696
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,696
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20


</TABLE>