alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3







Exhibit 10.3




Director* Compensation Summary




Meeting Fees





Directors of Mountain National Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) are paid $800 for each Board
meeting attended. The Chairman of the Board receives a fee of $1,700 for each Board meeting
attended.



Directors are reimbursed for their expenses incurred in connection with their activities as
the Company’s directors.



Committee Meeting Fees




Each director receives $225 for each Executive Loan Committee meeting attended and $180 for
each other Board committee meeting attended.



Equity Compensation




Each director is eligible to participate in the Company’s Stock Option Plan.



The foregoing information is summary in nature. Additional information regarding director
compensation will be provided in the Company’s proxy statement to be filed in connection with the
2010 annual meeting of the Company’s shareholders.




	 	 	 
	*	 	Includes directors that are also employees of the Company.




Named Executive Officer Compensation Summary




The following table sets forth the current base salary paid to Dwight Grizzell, the Company’s
President and Chief Executive Officer, Grace D. McKinzie, the Company’s Executive Vice
President-Chief Lending Officer, and Michael Brown, the Company’s Executive Vice President-Chief
Operating Officer, during the year ended December 31, 2009.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Executive Officer	 	Current Salary	 	 	Bonus	 
	Dwight B. Grizzell, President
	 	$	247,910	 	 	$	600	 
	Grace D. McKinzie
	 	$	159,697	 	 	$	5,600	 
	Michael Brown
	 	$	160,294	 	 	$	5,600	 






In addition to their base salary, Messrs. Grizzell and Brown and Ms. McKinzie are also
eligible to:




	 	•	 	Participate in the Company’s cash bonus plan;

	 
	 	•	 	Participate in the Company’s equity incentive programs, which currently
involves the award of stock options pursuant to the Company’s Stock Option Plan; and

	 
	 	•	 	Participate in the Company’s broad-based benefit programs generally available
to its employees, including health, disability and life insurance programs and the
Company’s 401(k) Plan.







The foregoing information in summary
in nature. Additional information regarding the named
executive officer compensation will be provided in the Company’s proxy statement to be filed
in connection with the 2010 annual meeting of the Company’s shareholders.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2631 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2631

     To require notice and comment for certain interpretive rules.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 3, 2015

 Mr. Russell introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To require notice and comment for certain interpretive rules.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Regulatory Predictability for 
Business Growth Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. REQUIRING NOTICE AND COMMENT FOR CERTAIN INTERPRETIVE RULES.

    Subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in section 551--
                    (A) in paragraph (13), by striking ``and'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) in paragraph (14), by striking the period at 
                the end and inserting a semicolon; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(15) `longstanding interpretive rule' means an 
        interpretive rule that has been in effect for not less than 1 
        year; and
            ``(16) `revise' means, with respect to an interpretive 
        rule, altering or otherwise changing any provision of a 
        longstanding interpretive rule that conflicts, or is in any way 
        inconsistent with, any provision in a subsequently promulgated 
        interpretive rule.''; and
            (2) in section 553--
                    (A) in subsection (b), following the flush text, in 
                subparagraph (A), by striking ``interpretative rules'' 
                and inserting ``an interpretive rule of an agency, 
                unless the interpretive rule revises a longstanding 
                interpretive rule of the agency''; and
                    (B) in subsection (d)(2), by striking 
                ``interpretative rules'' and inserting ``an 
                interpretive rule of an agency, unless the interpretive 
                rule revises a longstanding interpretive rule of the 
                agency, and''.
                                 <all>
```
114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2617 

AN ACT 

To amend the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 to postpone 

a scheduled increase in the minimum wage applicable 

to American Samoa. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2617 EH

1 SECTION 1. MINIMUM WAGE FOR AMERICAN SAMOA. 

2 (a) MINIMUM WAGE.—Paragraph (2) of section 

3 8103(b) of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 (29 

4 U.S.C. 206 note) is amended to read as follows: 

5 ‘‘(2) the minimum wage applicable to American 

6 Samoa under section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor 

7 Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) shall 

8 be— 

9 ‘‘(A) the applicable wage rate in effect for 

10 each industry and classification as of September 

11 29, 2015; and 

12 ‘‘(B) increased by $0.50 an hour (or such 

13 lesser amount as may be necessary to equal the 

14 minimum wage under section 6(a)(1) of such 

15 Act), beginning on December 31, 2016, and on 

16 December 31 of every third year thereafter, 

17 until the minimum wage applicable to American 

18 Samoa under this paragraph is equal to the 

19 minimum wage set forth in such section.’’. 

20 (b) GAO REPORTS.—Section 8104 of the Fair Min21 imum Wage Act of 2007 (29 U.S.C. 206 note) is amend22 ed— 

23 (1) in subsection (a)— 

24 (A) by striking ‘‘September 1, 2011’’ and 

25 inserting ‘‘April 1, 2017’’; and 
3 

•HR 2617 EH

1 (B) by striking the second sentence and in2 serting the following: ‘‘The Government Ac3 countability Office shall submit a subsequent 

4 report not later than April 1, 2020.’’; 

5 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘the study 

6 under subsection (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘any report 

7 under subsection (a)’’; and 

8 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(c) REPORT ON ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF IN10 CREASING THE MINIMUM WAGE IN AMERICAN SAMOA.— 

11 Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 

12 subsection, the Government Accountability Office shall 

13 transmit to Congress a report on alternative ways of in14 creasing the minimum wage in American Samoa to keep 

15 pace with the cost of living in American Samoa and to 

16 eventually equal the minimum wage set forth in section 

17 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 

18 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)).’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2015. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2617 

AN ACT 

To amend the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 to 

wage applicable to American Samoa. postpone a scheduled increase in the minimum
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

 

**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 Westell Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on their knowledge: 

 

| (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 result of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report. 

 

 

/s/ THOMAS E. MADER  

Thomas E. Mader

August 9, 2007

 

/s/AMY T. FORSTER

Amy T. Forster

August 9, 2007

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Westell Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Westell Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.
# C_2021052EN.01000101.xml

| 15.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10105 — FSN Capital/Obton Invest/Obton Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 52/01)

On 5 February 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10105. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10105. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Exhibit 13.2

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

The undersigned, Stuart Grant, the Chief Financial Officer of Serono S.A. (the "Company"), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report").

The
undersigned hereby certifies that:

|                        |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  | -----------------------
|                        |  |  | /s/STUART GRANT        
|                        |  |  | Stuart Grant           
|Date: February 28, 2006 |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5827 Received in Senate (RDS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5827

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2010

                                Received

                             August 5, 2010

                          Read the first time

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend title 11 of the United States Code to include firearms in the 
    types of property allowable under the alternative provision for 
                  exempting property from the estate.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Gun Owners in Bankruptcy 
Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTIONS.

    Section 522 of title 11, the United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (d) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(13) The debtor's aggregate interest, not to exceed 
        $3,000 in value, in a single rifle, shotgun, or pistol, or any 
        combination thereof.'', and
            (2) in subsection (f)(4)(A)--
                    (A) in clause (xiv) by striking ``and'' at the end,
                    (B) in clause (xv) by striking the period at the 
                end and inserting ``; and'', and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(xvi) The debtor's aggregate interest, not to exceed 
        $3,000 in value, in a single rifle, shotgun, or pistol, or any 
        combination thereof.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS.

    (a) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this Act 
and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Application of Amendments.--The amendments made by this Act 
shall apply only with respect to cases commenced under title 11 of the 
United States Code on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 28, 2010.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5825 

To review, update, and revise the factors to measure the severity, magnitude, 

and impact of a disaster and to evaluate the need for assistance to 

individuals and households. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2010 

Mr. HILL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To review, update, and revise the factors to measure the 

severity, magnitude, and impact of a disaster and to 

evaluate the need for assistance to individuals and households. 

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 ‘‘Multi-State Disaster 

5 Relief Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE FACTORS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—In order to provide more objective 

8 criteria for evaluating the need for assistance to individVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:28 Jul 24, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5825.IH H5825

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5825 IH

1 uals and households and to speed a declaration of a major 

2 disaster or emergency under the Robert T. Stafford Dis3 aster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 

4 5121 et seq.), not later than one year after the date of 

5 enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal 

6 Emergency Management Agency (referred to in this Act 

7 as the ‘‘Administrator’’), in cooperation with representa8 tives of State and local emergency management agencies, 

9 shall review, update, and revise through rulemaking the 

10 factors considered under section 206.48(b) of title 44, 

11 Code of Federal Regulations, to measure the severity, 

12 magnitude, and impact of a disaster. 

13 (b) CONSIDERATION OF A CONTIGUOUS COUNTY.— 

14 In reviewing, updating, and revising the factors referenced 

15 in subsection (a) the Administrator shall include as a fac16 tor whether a contiguous county in an adjacent state has 

17 been designated in a major disaster or emergency as a 

18 result of the same incident. 

19 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 3 months after the date 

20 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

21 to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

22 of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

23 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Sen24 ate a report on the Federal Emergency Management 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5825 IH

1 Agency’s current regulations, policies, procedures, and 

2 practices on— 

3 (1) recommending major disaster or emergency 

4 declarations in order to provide assistance to individ5 uals and households; and 

6 (2) making post-declaration designations of the 

7 need for assistance to individuals and households in 

8 a county that is contiguous to a State that has re9 ceived a major disaster or emergency declaration for 

10 the same incident. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
#### MONTEVERDE v. BOARD OF SUP’RS OF QUEENS COUNTY.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

May 14, 1894.)

Contracts—Substantial Performance.

A contract is substantially performed where the price of the work to be done is $21,000, and all had been done except small matters, which could be completed for $150.

Appeal from judgment on report of referee.

Action by Frank Monteverde against the board of supervisors of Queens county to recover the contract price of work done. There was a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before BROWN, P. J., and DYKMAN and PRATT, JJ.

John Fleming, for appellant.

Benjamin W. Downing (W. T. B. Milliken, of counsel), for respondent.

PRATT, J.

The determination of this cause depends largely on the question whether the plaintiff substantially performed his contract. That is ordinarily a question of fact. The contract price of the work was $21,700, and the referee finds that all the work-stipulated for was done, with the exception of some small matters, which could be completed for $154. The testimony abundantly supports that conclusion. It appears that the engineers of the county were in constant attendance while the work was in progress. It was done under their supervision, and the chief engineer certified to the county, before this action was commenced, that the road could be completed according to the contract for the sum of $501. At that time the plaintiff had done work for which he was then entitled to receive about $3,500, being the balance of 80 per cent, he had a right to draw as the work progressed. He urged the payment of this, and offered to complete the work. The defendant refused to pay him. By that breach of their duty plaintiff was authorized to bring his action for the work already done. The contract was substantially performed. Had it not been, the plaintiff would be entitled to recover for the work so far as done, as a consequence of defendant’s refusal to pay as required by the contract. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,326,302
<SECURITIES>                                   142,473
<RECEIVABLES>                                  605,261
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    607,620
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,748,953
<PP&E>                                         958,760
<DEPRECIATION>                                 100,515
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,667,693
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          712,498
<BONDS>                                         95,121
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,406
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,856,668
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,667,693
<SALES>                                      1,264,590
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,299,590
<CGS>                                        2,561,584
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,561,584
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,316,657
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (101,503)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,477,148)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,477,148)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,477,148)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.73)
        

</TABLE>
# Poverty Guidelines

Use this information as income guidelines based on household size when requesting a fee waiver (Form I-912, Request for Fee Waiver) based on limited income, or a reduced filing fee when filing Form N-400, Application for Naturalization.

The secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services establishes the Federal Poverty Guidelines annually.

These income guidelines are effective beginning Jan. 17, 2024.

04/01/2024

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
NOTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS, INC., Appellant

v.

ROKU, INC., Appellee

______________________

2023

- 1198

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2021

- 00758.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

M ICHAEL N ICODEMA

, Greenberg Traurig, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL, argued for appellant. Also represented by

E RIK B OKAR , Orlando, FL; B ENJAMIN G ILFORD

, J AMES J.
L UKAS

, J R

. , Chicago, IL.

R ICHARD C RUDO

, Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox PLLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by L ESTIN L. K ENTON

, J R

., W ILLIAM M ILLIKEN ; J ONATHAN D ANIEL B AKER , Dickinson Wright RLLP, Case: 23-1198 Document: 37 Page: 1 Filed: 06/11/2024Mountain View, CA ; M ICHAEL D AVID S AUNDERS , Dickinson Wright PLLC, Austin, TX.

______________________

THIS CAUSE h aving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST

, S CHALL

, and H UGHES

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

June 11 , 2024
Date Case: 23-1198 Document: 37 Page: 2 Filed: 06/11/2024
# FY 2021 Grant Recipients

## FY 2021 Citizenship and Integration Grant Program Award Recipients

In FY 2021, USCIS awarded nearly $10 million in grants to 40 organizations. The performance period is October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2023.

09/20/2021

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
EXHIBIT 32.2
 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
 Sarbanes-Oxley
 (1)
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2008 (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 M. SullivanJames M. SullivanChief Financial Officer