alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
11/6/2013

1

TWG

FY2015‐16 BUDGET DISCUSSION

Objective:  remind ourselves about the biennial

budget process

Prepare for the January Annual Reporting

Meeting

Think ahead to Spring 2014....

General Budget Process

• GCDAMP Budget Process paper May 6, 2010 and

as amended March 20, 2011 (Table 1), defined

roles and objectives and timeline

• Follow rules for year 1 of budget process (next

slide)

• Policy issues to AMWG ↔Technical issues to DOI

for consideration and response
11/6/2013

2

General Budget Process

DOI Budget Direction

JANUARY BOX

Annual reports meeting (2

days) followed by 1‐day TWG

meeting to review budget and

provide guidance to GCMRC

and BOR. TWG reviews

progress in addressing

Information Needs and

research accomplishments.

Budget Timeline – 40,000 ft level

• Annual Reporting Meeting (January 28‐30)

– Objective: initial list of budget concerns/issues to DOI

for consideration in development of budget

• April TWG: initial budget review (tables), in

person?

• AMWG April – ?

• Revised draft budget & workplan provided May

• BAHG & SA review May/June

• TWG review and recommendation June (in

person)
11/6/2013

3

Next Steps: 2015/16

• Nov. 22nd:  initial budget interest/concerns/ synthesis items to Linda

Whetton/SCAHG

– Use Science Questions document to help you, prompt you with

important issues, which important to you?

– Which management objectives questions will you ask?

– Personal challenge to each stakeholder to respond

• SCAHG will consider all input and provide to GCMRC/BOR in Nov.

• SCAHG/GCMRC/BOR coordinate on Jan. 28‐29 annual reporting

meeting agenda

• TWG homework: develop your budget ideas/concerns for January

30th meeting, last years items?

• January objective: budget ideas/concerns to GCRMC/BOR (maybe via

BAHG)

Ad Hocs

• SCAHG: develop agendas, general direction

• BAHG: review budget, make recommendations to TWG

• AHAHG: recommendations to BAHG on admin. History
11/6/2013

4

Ad Hocs

• CRAHG:

– Charge: The Cultural Resources Ad Hoc (CRAHG) will review the annual

budget recommendation on cultural program issues and make

recommendations to the BAHG. Additionally, the CRAHG will review the

treatment plan, the cultural properties monitoring program, and make

recommendations to TWG.

– TWG request: provide input to SCAHG on topics of interest for January

reporting meeting by Nov. 22nd, including tribal participation.

• SEAHG:

– Charge:  The SEAHG, working with GCMRC, will review the program

proposed by the SEAHG in 2012, and areas specified that may not be

pursued in the LTEMP and AMP related programs, and began to develop

draft recommendations for 2015/16 program activities as provided for in

the Secretary’s April 30, 2012 letter to the GCDAMP.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

WILLIAM ESTRADA

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 5

- 00 271

- C R

Appeal from the

205 th D istrict Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 20130D01284)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State ’s third motion for extension of time within which to file

the brief until August 3 , 2016

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

F ILE THE STATE ’S B R IEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime E. Esparza

, the State ’s attorney, prepare the

State ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before August 3 , 2016

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17 th day of June , 20 1 6

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Hughes , JJ.
**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 Annual Report of SRS Labs, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2004 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), JanetM. Biski, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to his knowledge:

 

1.                                       The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: May 17, 2005 | By:      | /s/ JANET M. BISKI                                       |
|---------------------|----------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|                |     | Janet M. Biski                                           |
| * *            | * * | *Chief Financial Officer**(Principal Financial Officer)* |

 

----
Status of the Upcoming 2013 Airborne Data Collection for Colorado River Corridor

The contract for the airborne collection and data processing has been finalized at a cost of $433,256 

($453,918 with overhead). This contract covers the cost of the airborne data collection of four-band 

imagery at 15-20-cm resolution and three panchromatic stereo images (looking forward, nadir, and 

backwards) for the entire river corridor. This cost also covers orthorectification of the four-band 

imagery and the production of a digital surface model (ellipsoid height images) of the corridor. GCMRC 

will support the airborne collection by placing over 150 ground control panels throughout the corridor 

(picked up one week after the overflight) and by operating 38 GPS base stations on the canyon rims such 

that there are at least two stations operating within 30 km of each day’s airborne collection. For this 

support, we have contracted to obtain additional GPS receivers and operations personnel. The total 

cost for all GPS base-station operations and calibration is $30,000. We are establishing 13 new base 

station locations during this collection to increase station density which also increases positional and 

vertical accuracies of the airborne data. The collection will commence Saturday, May 25th and will last 

no longer than 5 days under clear sky conditions. If weather causes collection delays, the flight 

contractor will deploy an additional aircraft at no additional cost (as in 2009) so that more territory can 

be collected within our daily flight window.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.02

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   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 Transmeta Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Svend-Olav
Carlsen, Chief Financial Officer and Vice President of Finance of the Company,
certify to the best of my knowledge, 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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, amended; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and result of
                  operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.


Date: May 4, 2004                          By: /s/ SVEND-OLAV CARLSEN
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Chief Financial Officer and
                                               Vice President of Finance,
                                               Transmeta Corporation

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

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2135

To amend title 42, United States Code, to protect human life.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 5, 1998

Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire (for himself, Mr. HELMS, and Mr. ASHCROFT)

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 42, United States Code, to protect human

life.

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 cited as the ‘‘Human Life Act of

5 1998’’.

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF HUMAN LIFE.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Title 42 of the United States

8 Code shall be amended at the end thereof by adding the

9 following new chapter:
2

S 2135 IS

1 ‘‘CHAPTER ll

2 ‘‘§ll. Protection of human life

3 ‘‘(a) The Congress finds that the right to life is the

4 paramount and most fundamental right of a person.

5 ‘‘(b) The Congress further finds that the life of each

6 human being begins at fertilization.

7 ‘‘(c) Upon the basis of these findings, and in the exer8 cise of the power of Congress under section 5 of the four9 teenth amendment to the Constitution, the Congress here10 by recognizes that for the purpose of enforcing the obliga11 tion of the States under the fourteenth amendment not

12 to deprive persons of life without due process of law, nor

13 to deny persons within their jurisdictions the equal protec14 tion of the laws, the word ‘person’ applies to all human

15 beings, irrespective of age, health, function, or condition

16 of dependency, including their unborn offspring at every

17 stage of their biological development including fertiliza18 tion.

19 ‘‘(d) No unborn child shall be deprived of life by any

20 person: Provided, however, That nothing in this section

21 shall prohibit a law allowing justification to be shown for

22 only those medical procedures required to prevent the

23 death of either the pregnant woman or her unborn off24 spring as long as such a law requires every reasonable ef25 fort to be made to preserve the lives of both of them.’’.

Æ
# C_2009270EN.01000901.xml

| 11.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5589 — SONY/SEIKO EPSON)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 270/02

On 22 September 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5589. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5589. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
#### John C. Kucewicz, Plaintiff, v Erma L. Kucewicz, Defendant; Dante S. Alberi, Appellant, and Jeffrey I. Klein, Respondent.

Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.
#### Joan Foley et al., Appellants, v Stasys Liogys et al., Respondents, et al., Third-Party Defendant.

Viewed in its most favorable light, the plaintiffs’ proof failed to establish that the defective condition in the sidewalk upon which the plaintiff Joan Foley fell was created by the defendants’ negligent repair work as opposed to the normal elements and passage of time *(see, e.g., Mandel v City of New York,*44 NY2d 1004; *Kaszovitz v Weiszman,*110 AD2d 117, 121). Therefore, the complaint was properly dismissed. Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Niehoff and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research: Aberdeen, ID
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Aberdeen, Idaho Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research People & Locations







Suraj  Sapkota
                        Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research

                        




                        
                        Research Geneticist (Plants)
                        Phone: (208) 991-5572
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### LAYMAN, Appellant, v. ANDERSON et al., Respondents (two cases).

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 15, 1897.)

Actions by John M. Layman against John Anderson & Co.

No opinion. Iteargument directed of appeal from order of October 26, 1895, granting new trial upon the trial justice’s minutes. Order of reversal entered April 24, 1896, and judgment which followed same entered May 26, 1896, and all proceedings thereunder vacated.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

SHELLEY UPTAIN TURNER,

Case No. 3: 16-cv-00314-CL

 Petitioner,

v. OPINION AND ORDER

STATE OF OREGON, et al.,

 Respondents.

_______________________________________

MCSHANE, Judge:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”), ECF 

No. 44, and the matter is now before this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 

72(b). Petitioner timely filed objections to the F&R. ECF No. 46. Accordingly, I have reviewed 

the file of this case de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. 

Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I find no error and conclude 

that the F&R is correct. Judge Clarke’s F&R is adopted in full. Consistent with Judge Clarke’s 

F&R, Ms. Turner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and this case DISMISSED 

with prejudice. Petitioner’s request for a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 28th day of June, 2018.

/s/ Michael McShane________

Michael J. McShane

United States District Judge
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daven Johne, Appellant.

The court’s charge as to criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, when read as a whole, adequately apprised the jury of the proper standard to apply *(see, People v Canty,*60 NY2d 830).

The defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research: Pullman, WA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pullman, Washington Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Collaborations The Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research has a long and productive history of collaborative research involving stakeholders.  Current collaborators and projects:  Management, Storage, and Research of National Seeds of Success Native Seed Collection  Evaluation and Genome-wide Association Study for Ashy Stem Blight Resistance in USDA Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) Germplasm  MP3: More Protein, More Peas, More Profit (MSU)  Facilitating Evaluation of Bean Common Mosaic Virus Isolates that Persist in NPGS Tepary Bean  Development of Genomic Resources to Improve Lima Bean Breeding for Consumer Quality and Agronomic Traits  Screening Beta Vulgaris Plant Introductions for Cercospora Leaf Spot and Bacterial Leaf Spot  High Through-put Phenotyping of 700 Pea Accessions for Yield Components Targeted Genomic Assisted Improvement of Seed Protein Concentration


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.2



THIRD AMENDMENT TO 
XENIA HOTELS & RESORTS, INC., XHR HOLDING, INC. AND XHR LP 
2015 INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN


            THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO XENIA HOTELS & RESORTS, INC., XHR HOLDING, INC. AND XHR LP 2015 INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN (this “Third Amendment”), dated as of April 30, 2020, is made and adopted by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”).  Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Plan (as defined below).


RECITALS


            WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc., XHR Holding, Inc. and XHR LP 2015 Incentive Award Plan (the “Plan”);


            WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12.1(a) of the Plan, the Plan may be wholly or partially amended at any time or from time to time by the Board; and 


            WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan as set forth herein. 


            NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended as set forth herein.


AMENDMENT


1.    The subsection (d) of Section 11.4 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in the entirety as follows:


“(d) Determine the terms and conditions of any Award granted pursuant to the Plan, including, but not limited to, the exercise price, grant price, or purchase price, any performance criteria, any restrictions or limitations on the Award, any schedule for vesting, lapse of forfeiture restrictions or restrictions on the exercisability of an Award, and accelerations or waivers thereof, and any provisions related to non-competition and recapture of gain on an Award, based in each case on such considerations as the Administrator in its sole discretion determines;”


2.    This Third Amendment shall be and is hereby incorporated in and forms a part of the Plan.


3.    Except as expressly provided herein, all terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.








[Signature Page Follows]







            I hereby certify that the foregoing Third Amendment was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc. on April 30, 2020.


            Executed on this 30th day of April, 2020.
	
					
	 
	 
	 
	/s/ Taylor C. Kessel
	 

	 
	 
	 
	Taylor C. Kessel

	 
	 
	 
	Senior Vice President and General Counsel
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-5570-LA and 333-43899 on Form S-3 and Form S-8, respectively, of our report
dated March 27, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Bristol Retail Solutions, Inc. as of December 31, 1996, and for the period from
inception (April 3, 1996) to December 31, 1996 included in its Annual Report
(Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

/S/ Ernst & Young LLP
-------------------------------
Orange County, California
April 15, 1998