alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment to the Employment Agreement




 Exhibit 10.22 
 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 THIS
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of the 24th day of February, 2009 (the “Effective Date”), by and between Spectrum Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) and Anthony L. Genito (the
“Executive”). 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive previously entered into that certain Employment
Agreement dated June 9, 2008 (the “Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish to
amend certain provisions of the Agreement in recognition of the Executive’s past services to the Company and the importance to the future success of the Company of the Executive’s continued services; and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual agreements contained herein (promises that include benefits to which the
Executive would not otherwise be entitled), and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Executive hereby agree as follows: 
 1. Capitalized Terms not defined herein shall have the meanings given those terms in the Agreement. 
 2. As of the Effective Date, Executive’s Base Salary was Three Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($375,000) per annum (the “Existing Base
Salary Amount”). For the period from March 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 (the “Temporary Reduction Period”), Executive’s Base Salary shall be Three Hundred and Fifty-Six Thousand, Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars
($356,250) per annum. As of January 1, 2010, Executive’s Base Salary shall return to the Existing Base Salary Amount. Notwithstanding this temporary reduction in Base Salary, for purposes of calculating any Bonus or other incentive plan
amounts or any other benefit specified in the Employment Agreement or any other agreement between the Company and the Executive, including any severance benefits included therein, earned during the Temporary Reduction Period, the Existing Base
Salary Amount shall be used as the Base Salary. 
 3. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement remains in full force and effect, and
the execution of this Amendment shall not affect the rights of the Company or the Executive under the terms of the Agreement as in effect immediately prior to the Effective Date with respect to events occurring before the Effective Date. 

[Signature Page Follows] 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
above written. 
  

			
	SPECTRUM BRANDS, INC
	
	 /s/ Kent J. Hussey

	By: Kent J. Hussey, Chief Executive Officer
	
	EXECUTIVE:
	
	 /s/ Anthony L. Genito

	Name: Anthony L. Genito
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding II, L.P. (the
"Partnership") for the period ended September 24, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John J.
Fosina, Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of the
Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
    of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ JOHN J. FOSINA
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    John J. Fosina *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: November 3, 2004
_______________________

*  John J. Fosina functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 32.2

                            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  of  Bluefly,   Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick
C. Barry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

         1. The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Patrick C. Barry
-----------------------
Patrick C. Barry
Chief Financial Officer
August 4, 2006
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-80325) pertaining to the Metamor Worldwide, Inc. Long-Term Incentive
Plan, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-3030) pertaining to the Metamor
Worldwide, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-46347) pertaining to the Metamor Technologies, Ltd. Restricted
Stock Plan and related Prospectuses of our report dated February 5, 1999, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of Metamor Worldwide, Inc.
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.


                                                 ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Houston, Texas
March 30, 1999
#### Ann M. Castronova, Appellant, v Gary Castronova, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 1.)

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs *(see, Kwartler v Kwartler,*291 NY 689; *Castro-nova v Castronova,*94 AD2d 979). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Conway, J. — blood-grouping test.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, O’Donnell and Pine, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Brandon C. Miller, Respondent, v Danielle J. Osik, Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 802]

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Lynaugh, J.), dated November 1, 2010, which, after a hearing, granted the father’s petition to modify an order of custody and visitation of the same court, dated April 12, 2007, by awarding him sole custody of the subject child.

Ordered that the order dated November 1, 2010, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The evidence established that the mother engaged in a course of conduct which intentionally interfered with the relationship between the child and the father. Such action is “so inconsistent with the best interests of the child as to per se raise a strong probability that the offending party is unfit to act as custodial parent” *(Matter of Chebuske v Burnhard-Vogt,*284 AD2d 456, 458 [2001]). Thus, the Family Court’s determination awarding custody to the father has a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see Matter of Lichtenfeld v Lichtenfeld,*41 AD3d 849, 850 [2007]; *Matter of Carl J.B. v Dorothy T.,*186 AD2d 736 [1992]). Mastro, A.P.J., Balkin, Sgroi and Cohen, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Jerrick Allison, Appellant, v Albert Prack, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

[944 NYS2d 708] —

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Gilpatric, J.), entered May 4, 2011 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner stopped by the classroom of a female teacher without permission and made inappropriate comments that she perceived as threatening. As a result, he was charged in a misbehavior report with stalking, engaging in harassment and being out of place. He was found guilty of the charges following a tier III disciplinary hearing; however, the determination was subsequently reversed and a rehearing ordered. Following the rehearing, petitioner was again found guilty of the charges and *1570the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding and, following joinder of issue, Supreme Court dismissed the petition. Petitioner appeals.

We affirm. Initially, petitioner’s challenge to the timeliness of the rehearing has not been preserved for our review due to his failure to object at the rehearing (see *Matter of Coleman v Fischer,*87 AD3d 778, 779 [2011]; *Matter of Taylor v Fischer,*80 AD3d 1037, 1037 [2011]). Moreover, there is no merit to his claim that the denial of certain legal documents deprived him of a fair and impartial rehearing given his inability to identify any such documents improperly withheld (see *Matter of Graziano v Selsky,*9 AD3d 752, 753 [2004]). We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

Peters, *P.J.,*Spain, Kavanagh, Stein and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Case 10-00751 Doc 3 Filed 01/11/10 Entered 01/11/10 11:01:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 10-00751 Doc 3 Filed 01/11/10 Entered 01/11/10 11:01:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 9
Case 10-00363 Doc 28 Filed 07/21/10 Entered 07/21/10 14:36:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 9
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,403,975
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  203,486
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (17,031)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,175,485
<PP&E>                                       3,462,436
<DEPRECIATION>                                (63,995)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,571,215
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,700,618
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,733
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,576,936
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,571,215
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,685,957
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              (2,770,800)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    56
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,909
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,077,878)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (409,594)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (668,284)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (668,284)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2020095EN.01003301.xml

| 23.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/33

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 31 January 2020 — Shindler and Others v Commission

(Case T-627/19 R)

(Interim measures - Area of freedom, security and justice - Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union - UK citizens residing in another EU Member State - Loss of EU citizenship - Action for failure to act - Inadmissibility of the application for interim measures)

(2020/C 95/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Harry Shindler (Porto d'Ascoli, Italy) and the five other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher, C. Giolito and E. Montaguti, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 279 TFEU and Article 156 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, seeking (i) suspension of the Commission’s express refusal of 13 September 2019 to recognise its failure to act, and (ii) an order requiring the Commission to take certain measures to maintain the applicants’ EU citizenship beyond the date of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and adopt an interim decision on an alternative status to that citizenship comprising various measures relating to entry, stay, social rights and professional activity applicable in the absence of agreement on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A)
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET & STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) FORM 10-K - COMMUNICATIONS & POWER
INDUSTRIES, INC FOR YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001000564
<NAME> COMMUNICATIONS & POWER INDUSTRIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-30-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1996
<CASH>                                           1,753
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,380
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     46,471
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               107,846
<PP&E>                                          79,873
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 228,142
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           73,270
<BONDS>                                        135,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           14,822
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,439
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   228,142
<SALES>                                        257,449
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               257,449
<CGS>                                          184,482
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  184,482
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,894
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,411
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,068
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,343
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,343
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 28 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 28

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR EVENT TO AWARD THE 
              CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used for an event on November 2, 2011, to award the 
Congressional Gold Medal, collectively, to the 100th Infantry 
Battalion, 442nd Regimental Combat Team, and the Military Intelligence 
Service, United States Army, in recognition of their dedicated service 
during World War II.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.

            Passed the Senate September 8, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
112th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            S. CON. RES. 28

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
 for an event to award the Congressional Gold Medal, collectively, to 
  the 100th Infantry Battalion, 442nd Regimental Combat Team, and the 
 Military Intelligence Service, United States Army, in recognition of 
              their dedicated service during World War II.
```
EXHIBIT 12.1

Computation of Ratio of Debt to Equity



|                     |  |                         |         |  |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  |  |      |         |  |  |   |         | 
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------- | ------- |  | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ------- |  |  | ---- | ------- |  |  | - | ------- | 
|                     |  | Year ended December 31, |        
|Dollars in thousands |  | 2011                    |         |  | 2010 |   |         | 2009 |  |   | 2008    |  |  | 2007 |        
|Debt                 |  | $                       | 357,779 |  |      | $ | 380,532 |      |  | $ | 382,522 |  |  | $    | 462,650 |  |  | $ | 542,549 | 
|Equity               |  |                         | 171,504 |  |      |   | 162,765 |      |  |   | 162,977 |  |  |      | 174,946 |  |  |   | 172,423 | 
|Debt to equity       |  |                         | 2.09    |  |      |   | 2.34    |      |  |   | 2.35    |  |  |      | 2.64    |  |  |   | 3.15    |
#### Irene Lieber, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[941 NYS2d 249]

In an action, inter aha, to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dabiri, J.), dated June 1, 2011, which granted the motion of the defendants City of New York and New York City Fire Department for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death against, among others, the City of New York and the New York City Fire Department (hereinafter together the defendants). The plaintiff alleged that the paramedics who responded to her 911 call seeking medical assistance for her husband (hereinafter the decedent) were negligent in their care and treatment of the decedent, resulting in his death.

The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to *716judgment as a matter of law through, inter alia, the submission of the affidavit of one of the paramedics who responded to the 911 call, the ambulance call report, and the defendants’ expert affirmation. The defendants’ expert opined, with a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the paramedics did not depart from good and accepted standards of emergency medical care during the treatment rendered to the decedent and that, in any event, the treatment did not proximately cause the decedent’s death *(see Forrest v Tierney,*91 AD3d 707 [2012]; *Graziano v Cooling,*79 AD3d 803, 804 [2010]).

In opposition, the plaintiff submitted an affirmation from a physician who was not authorized by law to practice in this State, and, thus, the affirmation did not constitute competent evidence *(see*CPLR 2106; *Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr.,*50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]; Palo *v Latt,*270 AD2d 323 [2000]). Moreover, the remaining evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the defendants’ motion was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. Rivera, J.P, Leventhal, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
# C_2021072EN.01002401.xml

| 1.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 January 2021 — Multi-Service v Commission

(Case T-873/19) (1)

(Environment - Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 - Fluorinated greenhouse gases - Electronic registry for quotas for placing hydrofluorocarbons on the market - Decision annulling the registration of an undertaking - Failure to provide the required information)

(2021/C 72/35)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Multi-Service S.A. (Kwidzyn, Poland) (represented by: P. Jankowski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Becker, M. Jáuregui Gómez and M. Rynkowski, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision ARES (2019) 6103796 of 3 October 2019, by which the Commission annulled the applicant’s registration in the registry established and managed by the Commission pursuant to Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Multi-Service S.A. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Multi-Service S.A. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.

---