alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w2



 






EXHIBIT 10.2




THIRD AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




          THIRD AMENDMENT dated as of July 29, 2005 (this “Amendment”) to EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT dated as
of February 13, 2003, as amended (the “Agreement”) by and between TRW Automotive Inc. (the
“Company”) and David L. Bialosky (“Executive”).




          WHEREAS, in order to extend the term of the Agreement, Executive and Company desire to amend
the Agreement as set forth below;




          In consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as follows:




          1. Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the
meanings assigned to them in the Agreement.




          2. Amendment to Section 1.b. of the Agreement. Section 1.b. of the Agreement shall be
amended in its entirety to read as follows:





b. Subject to the provisions of Section 7 of this Agreement, Executive shall
be employed by the Company for a period commencing on the Effective Date and
ending on December 31, 2008 (the “Employment Term”) on the terms and subject
to the conditions set forth in this Agreement; provided, however,
that commencing with January 1, 2009 and on each January 1 thereafter (each
an “Extension Date”), the Employment Term shall be automatically extended
for an additional one-year period, unless the Company or Executive provides
the other party hereto 60 days prior written notice before the next
Extension Date that the Employment Term shall not be so extended.



          3. No Other Amendments; Effectiveness. Except as set forth in this Amendment, the
Agreement is ratified and confirmed in all respects. This Amendment shall be effective as of the
date hereof.




          4. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of New York, without regard to conflicts of laws principles thereof.




          5. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be
an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same
instrument.




     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.



	 	 	 
	TRW Automotive Inc.
	 	David L. Bialosky
	 	 	 
	/s/ Joseph S. Cantie
	 	/s/ David L. Bialosky
	 
	 	 





By: Joseph S. Cantie





			
	Title:	 	Executive Vice President

and Chief Financial Officer
HARVEY v. McLAUGHLIN.

No. 553P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 15, 2005.

Michael C. Allen, Meredith T. Black, Raleigh, for Patrick D. McLaughlin.

Donald J. Dunn, New Bern, for John Harvey.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of November 2005 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 15th day of November 2005."
STATE v. GANT.

No. COA05-1573.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed August 15, 2006.

Certification Date September 5, 2006.

Appeal from Guilford (03CRS101653, 03CRS101656, 03CRS101657, 04CRS24027).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
IN RE B.D.C.

COA06-93.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 21, 2006.

Certification Date December 11, 2006.

Appeal from the Moore (04J131).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leon D. Hughes, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[801 NYS2d 208]

*1395Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered September 13, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Same memorandum as in *People v Hughes*(21 AD3d 1394 [2005]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Gorski, Smith and Lawton, JJ.
#### Toby Migliacci, Respondent, v Berke & Berke et al., Appellants.

[799 NYS2d 745]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered March 25, 2004, as denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provisions thereof denying those branches of the cross motion which were to dismiss the second, third, fourth, and fifth causes of action, and substituting therefor provisions granting those branches of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The gravamen of the plaintiffs claim is that the defendants compelled her to execute a settlement agreement with respect to the defendants’ attorney’s fee by depositing $125,000 received from her former husband in settlement of their divorce action into the defendants’ escrow account and unlawfully withholding those funds in violation of the parties’ retainer agreement. There are triable issues of fact which precluded the granting of summary judgment with respect to the first, sixth, seventh, and eighth causes of action which seek to recover damages based upon alternative theories of liability, and the defendants’ motion was properly denied with respect to those causes of action.

However, with respect to the second, third, fourth, and fifth causes of action, alleging breach of other provisions of the par*460ties’ retainer agreement, and the failure to file the agreement and a statement of net worth with the Supreme Court, the defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Behrins & Behrins v Sammarco,*305 AD2d 346, 348 [2003]; *Markard v Markard,*263 AD2d 470 [1999]). Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing those causes of action. H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Skelos, JJ., concur.
BUCKLAND v. HOBBS

No. COA05-698

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed March 21, 2006

Certification Date April 10, 2006

Appeal from Alamance (04CVD2112).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. MILLER.

No. COA05-1654.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed October 3, 2006

Certification Date October 23, 2006.

Appeal from Guilford (03CRS86858)

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE of North Carolina v. Tarvaris Novack MICKENS.

No. 378P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2005.

Richard B. Glazier, Fayetteville, for Tarbaris Novack Mickens.

Norma S. Harrell, Special Deputy Attorney General, Thomas H. Lock, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 13th day of July 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th day of August 2005."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 13th day of July 2005 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th day of August 2005."
No. 85-1734.

#### Connor et al. *v.*Phillips et al.

Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.
# L_2013185EN.01000801.xml

| 4.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 185/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 185/8

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2013/352/CFSP

of 2 July 2013

amending Decision 2012/440/CFSP appointing the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28, Article 31(2) and Article 33 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 25 July 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/440/CFSP (1) appointing Mr Stavros LAMBRINIDIS as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights. The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 30 June 2014. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 25 July 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/440/CFSP (1) appointing Mr Stavros LAMBRINIDIS as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights. The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 30 June 2014.

| (2) | Decision 2012/440/CFSP provided the EUSR with the financial reference amount covering the period from 25 July 2012 to 30 June 2013. A new financial reference amount for the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 should be established. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Decision 2012/440/CFSP provided the EUSR with the financial reference amount covering the period from 25 July 2012 to 30 June 2013. A new financial reference amount for the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 should be established.

| (3) | Decision 2012/440/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Decision 2012/440/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 5(1) of Decision 2012/440/CFSP, the following subparagraph is added:

"The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR in the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 shall be EUR 837 000.".

Article 2

Entry into force

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

It shall apply from 1 July 2013.

Done at Brussels, 2 July 2013.

For the Council

The President

L. LINKEVIČIUS

---

(1)  
  OJ L 200, 27.7.2012, p. 21.

1

---
10-Q Exhibit 32.2: Certifications 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 iShares COMEX Gold Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Francis Ryan, Chief Financial Officer of Barclays Global Investors, N.A., the Sponsor of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended; and

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

Date: August 14, 2006

|                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                    
|/s/    FRANCIS RYAN                                                 
|Francis Ryan * Chief Financial Officer (Principal financial officer)



|* | The Registrant is a trust and Mr. Ryan is signing in his capacity as an officer of Barclays Global Investors, N.A., the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE v. LACHIUSA.

No. COA06-43.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed July 5, 2006.

Certification Date July 25, 2006.

Appeal from Pamlico (03CRS50246).

Case without published opinion. No error.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5756 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5756

    To reauthorize the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2008

Mr. Kind (for himself and Mr. Gilchrest) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To reauthorize the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION 
              ACT.

    Section 10 of the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 
U.S.C. 6109) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``for each of fiscal 
        years 2006 through 2010 the amount specified for that fiscal 
        year in subsection (b)'' and inserting ``the amounts specified 
        in subsection (b)''; and
            (2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
    ``(b) Authorized Amount.--The amounts referred to in subsection (a) 
are the following:
            ``(1) $8,000,000 for each of fiscal year 2010.
            ``(2) $11,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
            ``(3) $13,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.
            ``(4) $16,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
            ``(5) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.
            ``(6) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Vice President and Cashier of Communitycorp (the Company), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the date of this certification:



| | 1. | The annual report of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: March 26, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ W. Roger Crook                   
|                     |  |     |  | W. Roger Crook                       
|                     |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  |    
|Date: March 26, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Gwendolyn P. Bunton              
|                     |  |     |  | Gwendolyn P. Bunton                  
|                     |  |     |  | Vice President and Cashier
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCUIT

No. 11-50857 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JULIO LEMOS-ZAMORA, also known as Carlos Aldana-Soriano, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:11-CR-494-1

Before BENAVIDES, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Julio Lemos-Zamora appeals the 46-month withi n - guidelines sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for ille g al reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Lemos-Zamora argues that his sentence is unreason ab l e as measured by the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He also argues that his withinguidelines sentence is not entitled to a presumption of reasonableness because the illegal reentry Guidelines are not empirically based. As acknowledged by Lemos-Zamora, that ar gu m e nt is foreclosed. See United States v. Duarte , 569 U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D May15 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-50857 Document: 00511855684 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2012No. 11-50857

F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago , 564 F.3d 357, 366-67 (5th Cir. 2009). Because Lemos-Zamora’s arguments fail under either a plain error or an abuse of discretion standard of review, we need not decide whether, despite his arguments in the district court in support of a downward variance, LemosZamora’s failure to object to the reasonableness of his sentence results in plain error review. The record reflects that the distri c t court considered Lemos-Zamora’s mitigation arguments, weighed the § 3553(a) f actor s , and provided a reasoned basis for its deci s i o n . Lemos-Zamora’s disagreement with the district court’s balancing of the § 3553(a) factors is insufficient to establish error on the district court’s part. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). Lemos-Zamora has failed to establish that his sentence, which is entitled to a presumption of reasonablen e s s , w a s the result of error, much less plain

error. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); Mondragon-Santiago , 564 F.3d at 366-67. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 11-50857 Document: 00511855684 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2012
```

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 131 (Monday, July 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 41189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14645]

[[Page 41189]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special Projects 
Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special 
Projects Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is 
soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving 
customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. This meeting will 
still be held via teleconference.

DATES: The meeting will be held Wednesday, August 10, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Antoinette Ross at 1-888-912-1227 or 
202-317-4110.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special Projects 
Committee will be held Wednesday, August 10, 2022, at 11:00 a.m. 
Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure 
of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with 
Antoinette Ross. For more information please contact Antoinette Ross at 
1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4110, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution 
Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at the website: 
http://www.improveirs.org. The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: July 5, 2022.
Kevin Brown,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2022-14645 Filed 7-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-40622

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARTIN PEREZ-PADRON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No.2:09-CR-149-1

Before KING, JOLLY, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Martin Perez-Padron presents

arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Cepeda-Rios, 530

F.3d 333, 335-36 (5th Cir. 2008), which held that even after Lopez v. Gonzales,

549 U.S. 47 (2006), a second state conviction for simple possession of a controlled

substance qualifies as an aggravated felony that supports the imposition of an

eight-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). The appellant’s

unopposed motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 15, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
exv10w4



 






Exhibit 10.4




SEVENTH AMENDMENT

TO THE JANUS CAPITAL GROUP INC.

401(k), PROFIT SHARING AND EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN




     The Janus Capital Group Inc. 401(k), Profit Sharing and Employee Stock Ownership Plan, as
restated effective November 1, 2001 (the “Plan”) is hereby amended as follows, effective April 1,
2005:




	 	1.	 	Section 1.33 of the Plan hereby is amended by deleting the current final paragraph
thereunder, and replacing it with the following paragraph:
	 
	 	 	 	Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Section 1.33, the Accrued Benefit
of each Participant who terminates employment with the Employer on account of a Job
Elimination (defined below) shall be fully vested and 100% nonforfeitable. For
purposes of this Section 1.33, “Job Elimination” shall mean the termination of a
Participant’s employment with all Employers as a result of the elimination of the
Participant’s position in the group, division, department or branch in which the
Participant works, because of a corporate transaction or reorganization,
outsourcing, technology change, reduced work volume or another business reason. A
Participant’s termination of employment with the Employers is not on account of a
Job Elimination if the Participant’s employment is terminated due to death,
disability, voluntary termination of employment, or any involuntary termination of
employment initiated by an Employer for cause, inadequate job performance or any
other reason that results in the Participant’s position remaining open to be filled
by a new hire.
	 
	 	2.	 	Except as amended above, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Janus Capital Group Inc. has executed this Seventh Amendment as of this
1st day of April, 2005.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Janus Capital Group Inc.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Girard C. Miller
 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 



	 
	ATTEST:

	 

	/s/ Curt R. Foust
**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 Stratum Holdings, Inc. (the “small
      business issuer”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, D. Hughes Watler, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the small business issuer,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
      this
      Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities and 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
                small
                business issuer.








/s/
      D.
      Hughes Watler, Jr.


D.
      Hughes Watler, Jr.


Chief Financial Officer


May 15, 2007