alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.1






Exhibit 10.1




EXECUTION COPY




FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into
by and between RHI Entertainment, LLC (together with any predecessor or successor thereto, the
“Company”) and Robert Halmi, Jr. (“the “Executive”), as of December 10, 2008.



WITNESSETH:




     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive previously entered into an Employment Agreement dated
November 8, 2007 and effective as of January 12, 2006 (the “Employment Agreement”);



     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement in certain
respects.



     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and their mutual covenants and promises
contained herein, the Company and Executive agree to the following:




	 	1.	 	Paragraph 2(b) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety as follows:






	 	 	 	“Term of Employment. The term of employment under this Agreement (the
“Term”) shall be for the period beginning on January 12, 2009 (the
“Effective Date”) and ending on the second anniversary thereof, unless
earlier terminated as provided in Section 4. The employment term hereunder shall
automatically be extended for successive one-year periods (“Extension
Terms”) unless either party gives notice of non-extension to the other no later
than 30 days prior to the expiration of the then-applicable Term.






	 	2.	 	Paragraph 3(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety as follows:






	 	 	 	“Annual Base Salary. During the Term, the Executive shall receive a
base salary (the “Annual Base Salary”) at a rate of $2,065,250 per annum,
which amount shall be increased by 5% per annum on a cumulative basis on
each anniversary of the Effective Date. The Annual Base Salary shall be
payable in accordance with the customary payroll practices of the Company.”






	 	3.	 	All other provisions of the Employment Agreement not affected by this Amendment shall
remain in full force and effect.





1









 





EXECUTION COPY




     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE COMPANY and Executive have freely and voluntarily executed this
Agreement as of the date and year first above written.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	RHI Entertainment, LLC	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:	 	/s/ Henry S. Hoberman 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Title:	 	Executive Vice President &
General Counsel 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Robert Halmi, Jr.	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Robert Halmi, Jr.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Residence:

18 Rocky Point Road

Rowayton, CT 06853	 	 







2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [RTID 0648-XB322]

# AGENCY:

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

# ACTION:

Notice of cancellation of a meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) has cancelled a public meeting of its Monkfish Committee that was scheduled for Wednesday, September 1, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The original meeting notice published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Monday, August 16, 2021 (86 FR 45711).                

                    The meeting will be rescheduled at a later dated and announced in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

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

      ( print page 46838)    
Dated: August 17, 2021.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-17884 Filed 8-19-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Exhibit 4(g)


 


	
  Protective Life Insurance Company

  	
  P. O. Box 10648

  	
  Birmingham, Alabama 35202-0648

  



 


ENDORSEMENT TO ESTABLISH THE DEFAULT
SUBSEQUENT


GUARANTEED INTEREST RATE PERIOD


 


The
Contract or Certificate to which this Endorsement is attached is amended to
change the default allocation if the Owner does not instruct us how to allocate
the maturing Sub-Account Value at the end of its Guaranteed Period.


 


The
last sentence of the second paragraph of the section entitled “INTEREST CREDITED AND GUARANTEED PERIODS” is
deleted and replaced with the two new sentences below.


 


“Unless
you instruct us otherwise in writing prior to the end of the existing Sub-Account’s
guaranteed period, your ending Sub-Account Value will be automatically
transferred to a new Sub-Account with a 1-year Interest Guaranteed Period. No
Surrender Charge or Market Value Adjustment will apply to amounts transferred,
withdrawn or surrendered from any 1-year Subsequent Guaranteed Period.”


 


Signed
for the Company and made a part of the Contract or Certificate as of its
Effective Date.


 


	
  Protective
  Life Insurance Company

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ Deborah J. Long

  	
   

  
	
  Secretary

  	
   

  



 


	
  IPD-2095

  	
  3/09
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1919

To provide for the energy security of the Nation through encouraging the

production of domestic oil and gas resources from stripper wells on

Federal lands, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 2, 1998

Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself, Mr. NICKLES, Mrs. HUTCHISON, and Mr.

DOMENICI) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To provide for the energy security of the Nation through

encouraging the production of domestic oil and gas resources from stripper wells on Federal lands, and for

other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be referred to as the ‘‘Federal Oil and

5 Gas Stripper Well Preservation Act of 1998’’.

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this Act:
2

S 1919 IS

1 (1) FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘Federal land’’

2 means land that is owned by the United States and

3 administered by the Secretary of the Interior, acting

4 through the Director of the Bureau of Land Man5 agement;

6 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means

7 the Secretary of the Interior; and,

8 (3) STRIPPER WELL.—The term ‘‘stripper well’’

9 or ‘‘stripper well property’’ means a federal lease or

10 portion thereof segregated for royalty purposes, a

11 communitization agreement, or a participating area

12 of a unit agreement, operated by the same operator,

13 that produces an average of less than 15 barrels of

14 oil or 90 thousand cubic feet of natural gas per eligi15 ble well per day. The Secretary shall provide by rule

16 the relevant period during which production shall be

17 averaged for purposes of this definition.

18 SEC. 3. AUTHORITY TO REDUCE ROYALTY RATES FOR

19 STRIPPER WELLS ON FEDERAL LANDS.

20 (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the

21 Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to provide per22 manent regulatory authority, which shall be updated from

23 time to time, to provide royalty rate reductions for strip24 per well properties on Federal lands.
3

S 1919 IS

1 (b) Current authority for stripper well royalty rate

2 reductions contained in 43 C.F.R. part 3100 shall be

3 amended in accordance with this Act.

4 SEC. 4. SUSPENSION OF MINIMUM ROYALTY AND PER ACRE

5 RENTAL.

6 (a) During the period of any royalty rate reduction

7 for stripper well properties on Federal lands, the Secretary

8 shall also suspend the minimum royalty and per acre lease

9 rental for so long as the royalty rate reduction is in effect.

10 (b) Once a royalty rate reduction for a stripper well

11 property on Federal lands is terminated by the Secretary,

12 the lease rental and minimum royalty shall be reinstated

13 to the applicable rate(s) that would pertain without regard

14 to any period of time elapsed during which the royalty rate

15 reduction or suspension of lease rental rate or minimum

16 royalty was in effect.

Æ
NUMBER 13-21-00261-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

____________________________________________________________

JUSTIN ROY LAMMERS, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 2nd 25th District Court

of Lavaca County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Silva

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa

Appellant attempted to perfect an appeal from a conviction for possession of 

controlled substance in penalty group one. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Sentence in this matter was imposed with a judgment of conviction by jury entered 

on June 8, 2021. On August 17, 2021, a notice of appeal was filed. On August 18, 2021, 
2

the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that it appeared the appeal was not timely 

perfected. Appellant was advised the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not 

corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. Appellant did 

not respond, and the defect is uncured.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2 provides that an appeal is perfected when 

notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended 

in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). 

Where a timely motion for new trial has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within 

ninety days after the sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. TEX. R. APP. P. 

26.2(a)(2). The time within which to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days 

after the deadline for filing the notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion 

complying with Rule 10.5(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 26.3.

This Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed 

notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent a 

timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the 

merits of the appeal in a criminal case and can take no action other than to dismiss the 

appeal for want of jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1998). Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing a post-conviction writ 

of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; however, the 

availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM.
3

PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1999).

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

LETICIA HINOJOSA

Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the

16th day of September, 2021.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1958 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1958

            To suspend temporarily the duty on ferroniobium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 20, 1998

 Mr. Santorum introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on ferroniobium.

    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 ON FERRONIOBIUM.

    (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 subheading:

      

``    9902.72.02    Ferroniobium                                                                                
                     (provided for                                                                              
                     in subheading                                                                              
                     7202.93.00)....  Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/    
                                                                                             31/2002            
                                                                                                              ''

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

<ARTICLE>                                                5
<CIK>                                           0000823072
<NAME>                               THE TIREX CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                             1
<CURRENCY>                                             USD

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                             177,256
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       51,434
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         25,698
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,806,508
<PP&E>                                           2,282,295
<DEPRECIATION>                                      42,770
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,398,004
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,510,884
<BONDS>                                            766,600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            97,360
<OTHER-SE>                                         348,636
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,398,004
<SALES>                                            390,848
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   406,270
<CGS>                                              204,988
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      204,988
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,953,622
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 119,923
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,909,879)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (4,909,879)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (4,909,879)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.07)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350

Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the
undersigned Senior Vice President  Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Nicholas Financial, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
ended September 30, 2007 (the Report) 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 Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Ralph T. Finkenbrink                         
|Ralph T. Finkenbrink                             
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                                                 
|Dated: November 9, 2007
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GEORGINA MARTINEZ QUEZADA,

Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 15-70874

Agency No. A095-773-678

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 26, 2016**

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Georgina Martinez Quezada, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se 

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from

an immigration judge’s decision denying relief. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 

U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 2 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-70874 

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary denial of voluntary 

departure. See Gil v. Holder, 651 F.3d 1000, 1003 (9th Cir. 2011), overruled on 

other grounds by Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S.Ct. 1678 (2013). Martinez 

Quezada’s contention that the agency did not consider both positive and negative 

factors in evaluating whether to grant voluntary departure lacks support in the 

record and is not sufficiently colorable to invoke our jurisdiction. See MartinezRosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005) (absent a colorable legal or 

constitutional claim, the court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary 

determinations (citation omitted)). 

In light of the discretionary denial of voluntary departure, the agency did not 

err in declining to address Martinez Quezada’s statutory eligibility for voluntary 

departure. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
EXHIBIT 32(a)

                            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 Oak Hill  Financial,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, R.
E. Coffman, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  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/ R. E. Coffman, Jr.


R. E. Coffman, Jr.
President & Chief Executive Officer


May 26, 2006

                                      -24-
#### Anderson P. THURSTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard CELLI, Sgt.; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-15588.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*139Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 19, 2011.

Anderson P. Thurston, lone, CA, pro se.

Matthew J. Leblanc, Esquire, City Attorney’s Office, Santa Rosa, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAYY, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Anderson P. Thurston appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants, Santa Rosa police officers, violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments when they shot and killed his son, Haki Thurston. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, and we may affirm on any ground supported by the record. *Moreland v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t,*159 F.3d 365, 369 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

It is uncontested on this record that defendants had probable cause to believe that Haki Thurston had, on the night of the shooting, shot and killed his cousin. In addition, it is uncontested that defendants had probable cause to believe that Haki Thurston was involved in a residential burglary prior to the evening in question that included the theft of firearms. Finally, it is uncontested that at the time of the shooting, defendants had probable cause to believe that Haki Thurston was armed and dangerous and was fleeing the police to evade arrest. Defendants’ actions were therefore reasonable, and they are entitled to qualified immunity. *See Long v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu,*511 F.3d 901, 906 (9th Cir.2007) (in determining objective reasonableness of use of deadly force, courts should consider “the severity of the crime at issue, whether the *140suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); *see also Cnty. of Sacramento v. Lewis,*523 U.S. 833, 853-54, 118 S.Ct. 1708, 140 L.Ed.2d 1043 (1998) (when unforeseen circumstances demand an instant judgment on the part of an officer who feels the pulls of competing obligations, only a purpose to cause harm unrelated to the legitimate object of arrest will satisfy the shocks-the-conscience test and give rise to a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Thurston’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions. *See Winterrowd v. Am. Gen. Annuity Ins. Co.,*556 F.3d 815, 819 (9th Cir.2009) (setting forth standard of review).

Thurston’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Thurston’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.