alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2


 


AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment to Agreement (this “Amendment”)
amends that certain Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of March 6,
2009, by and between Michaels Stores, Inc. (the “Company”) and John B.
Menzer (the “Executive”), and is entered into as of the 2nd day of June, 2009.


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish to amend
the Agreement as set forth herein in order to reflect the modified agreement
between the Company and the Executive regarding the Executive’s restricted stock
award and option grant;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing
premises and the mutual promises, terms, provisions and conditions set forth
herein, the Company and the Executive hereby agree as follows:


 


1.     Section 4(f) of the Agreement is amended to read in
its entirety as follows:


 


“Restricted Stock Grant. As soon as reasonably practicable
following the commencement of Executive’s employment with the Company, the
Company shall provide Executive with a grant of 500,000 shares of restricted
stock pursuant to the form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement attached as Exhibit A.”


 


2.     Section 4(g) of the Agreement is amended to read in
its entirety as follows:


 


“Option Grant. As
soon as reasonably practicable following the commencement of Executive’s
employment with the Company, the Company will grant to Executive an option to
purchase 2,500,000 shares of common stock pursuant to the Stock Option
Agreement attached as Exhibit B.”


 


3.     Exhibit A-1 and A-2 to the Agreement are hereby deleted in
their entirety and replaced with the Restricted Stock Award Agreement attached
hereto as Appendix A.


 


4.     Exhibit B to the Agreement is hereby deleted in its
entirety and replaced with the Stock Option Agreement attached hereto as
Appendix B.


 


5.     Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, all existing
provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect


 


6.     This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each
of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one
and the same instrument.


 


7.     This is a Texas contract and shall be construed and enforced
under and be governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Texas,
without regard to the conflict of laws principles thereof.


 

















 


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


 


 


	
  MICHAELS STORES, INC.

  	
   

  	
  THE EXECUTIVE

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   /s/ Michael J. Veitenheimer 
  

  	
   

  	
  /s/   John B. Menzer

  
	
  By:

  	
  Michael J. Veitenheimer

  	
   

  	
     John B. Menzer

  
	
  Title:

  	
  Senior Vice President,
  General Counsel

  and Secretary

  	
   

  	
   

  



 

















 


Appendix A


 


Restricted Stock Award Agreement


 

















 


Appendix B


 


Stock Option Agreement
|Exhibit 21


The following is a list of wholly
owned subsidiaries, unless otherwise noted, of FPIC Insurance Group, Inc. as of December
31, 2002:
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Name of Subsidiary                                 | State of Incorporation
|-------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------
|First Professionals Insurance Company, Inc. (First |                       
|Professionals)                                     |                       
|                                                  
|Anesthesiologists Professional Assurance Company   |                       
|                                                  
|FPIC Insurance Agency, Inc.                        |                       
|                                                  
|Employers Mutual, Inc.                             |                       
|                                                  
|FPIC Services, Inc.                                |                       
|                                                  
|Professional Strategy Options, Inc.                |                       
|                                                  
|Administrators For The Professions, Inc. (AFP)     |                       
|                                                  
|Group Data Corporation                             |                       
|(100% owned by AFP)                                |                       
|                                                  
|FPIC Intermediaries, Inc.                          |                       
|(100% owned by AFP)                                |                       
|                                                  
|The Tenere Group, Inc. (Tenere)                    |                       
|(100% owned by First Professionals)                |                       
|                                                  
|Intermed Insurance Company (Intermed)              |                       
|(100% owned by Tenere)                             |                       
|                                                  
|Trout Insurance Services, Inc.                     |                       
|(100% owned by Intermed)                           |                       
|                                                  
|Interlex Insurance Company                         |                       
|(100% owned by Intermed)                           |                       
|                                                  
|Insurance Services, Inc.(100% owned by Intermed)   |                       

|118
|---
<Page>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                    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



       In connection with the Annual report of Physiometrix, Inc. on Form 10-K
for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel W. Muehl, Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my 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 results of operations of
       Physiometrix, Inc.


Date: March 28, 2003                     /s/ DANIEL W. MUEHL
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Daniel W. Muehl
                                         Vice President and Chief
                                         Financial Officer
                                         (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                         Officer)
#### Sandy Adams v. Minnie A. Indelli and Another. Adolph Streitfeld v. Charles L. Levi and Joseph B. Levi. Nathan Bilder v. Charles E. Ellis. John P. Cohalan v. New York Press Company.

Motions granted unless appellants comply with terms of orders.
Exhibit 32

REX Stores Corporation
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned officers of REX Stores Corporation (the Company) hereby certify,
to their knowledge, that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended April 30, 2009 which this certificate accompanies, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

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 the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ Stuart A. Rose      
|Stuart A. Rose          
|                        
|/s/ Douglas L. Bruggeman
|Douglas L. Bruggeman    
|                        
|Dated: June 9, 2009     

43

---
Exhibit (23)

BROWN,
EDWARDS &
COMPANY, L.L.P.
Certified Public Accountants


                          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                      REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-36876) of FNB Corporation of our
report dated February 21, 2006 related to the consolidated balance sheets of
FNB Corporation and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the
related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income, changes
in stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2005, and our report dated February 21, 2006, with
respect to management's report on internal control over financial reporting
and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting appearing
in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of FNB Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 2005.


                                      s/Brown, Edwards & Company, L.L.P.
                                         CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

Christiansburg, Virginia
February 21, 2006


        Providing Professional Business Advisory & Consulting Services

100 Arbor Drive, Suite 108   Christiansburg, VA 24073   540-381-9333
Fax:  540-381-8319   www.BEcpas.com
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2498

To authorize the Smithsonian Institution to plan, design, construct, and

equip laboratory, administrative, and support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter

Array located on Mauna Kea at Hilo, Hawaii.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 2, 2000

Mr. MOYNIHAN (for himself, Mr. COCHRAN, and Mr. FRIST) introduced the

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on

Rules and Administration

A BILL

To authorize the Smithsonian Institution to plan, design,

construct, and equip laboratory, administrative, and support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian

Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter Array located

on Mauna Kea at Hilo, Hawaii.

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

3 SECTION 1. FACILITY AUTHORIZED.

4 The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution

5 is authorized to plan, design, construct, and equip labora6 tory, administrative, and support space to house base op7 erations for the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
2

•S 2498 IS

1 Submillimeter Array located on Mauna Kea at Hilo,

2 Hawaii.

3 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

4 There are authorized to be appropriated to the Board

5 of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to carry out this

6 Act, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, and $2,500,000 for

7 fiscal year 2002, which shall remain available until

8 expended.

Æ
**.OFFICE OF**  **THE &n,ORNN**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

conorable C. Sirmons ;ountyAuditor ::caderson

County bth~kms,

Texas

-Opinion ls!o. O-7474 A

Zci have iec Cord.ssionersf ..Court 0 nttolnc?y

.toact as lo **P-ax23** to,?ay hi* a mo

The dommSeiioners~ Court may employ bunsel and. coqxmsate hti. from the'gener&,

m when the matters.involved sre thoee concerniq the coun%y as .awhole, .where.the.regu&arly constitutedpublic officialscould,

not or. would not act, or where public interest ww SO LTeat as to warrant such extra-lo@. services. City Hational 3ank V* PresidioCounty, 26 S.Fi. 775; GalvestonCounty V. Gre~shan, 220.S,.'-J. fjion.

C. SLmons 7 Pas& 2' .., :

560 ax-orrofusedg Opinions

of the &ttorney

Generalof Texas Ho. O4354 and x0. o-1372.

Article334s Vernoxits Annotated

CivQ 8t~atute0,

wae in-~ tendedto isqosea duty upon the County and Eistriot attormys 50 &ve advicet.0

the Comm~s~ton0rs~

Courtwhen roquwt is mad8 there for Sn k but this ir!

no% +Irestrfction

iqma th8,Comissfoners~ Court he enplomr.% of sttor+ys to r.dvise Rnd render serrices to the Court in important mmere,comln~ before it for itrrconsideration. Gibscm

v. Davis; 236 S.%'i', 202.
.In tlia case of Groomsv. ktacosa County,,

32.S.W. WO, the ~om5osionez3*~

Coxirt mu&t to .arqploy

a12 at&me Sor on0 year.-The Cow of C~5vil.A~$ea&s held t as le&l advisor L t the Ctmiosioqsrst Courtwas not authorlsed to Etgfro

sua& a co@irs.ct+

and could n5t pay an attorney

for ?ervicea-.ne$%4je?? required aor perform&l.

&n~&&'opinioa~t&~'the Taw,does i It ia &Ur &n~&&'opinioa~t&~'the Taw,does kot 5ntend that the~Co~nu5szg5oners~ Cout%~ha&l employ~c~nsel.aa-a salarybas5s the~Co~nu5szg5oners~

Cout%~ha&l employ~c~nsel.aa-a t~adv5sc end represent tt. in wbaWmrmtt+?~rs u5ght arise. t~adv5sc mpsent 5in wbaWmrmtt+?~rs 'I %
# Robert A. Taft: A Featured Biography

**

----

Senator Robert A. Taft (1889-1953), son of President William Howard Taft, became known as "Mr. Republican" for helping to rebuild his party after the Great Depression and the Democratic dominance of the New Deal years. When the 1946 election gave the Republicans control of the Senate, Taft chose not to serve as majority leader. Instead, he chaired the Republican Policy Committee, where he helped plan his party's legislative agenda. He also chaired the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee and sponsored the Taft-Hartley Labor Act of 1947. When President Harry Truman called Congress into extraordinary session in 1948, Taft blocked all legislative action, inadvertently contributing to Truman's successful reelection. Taft did agree—reluctantly—to become Senate majority leader in January of 1953. Tragically, he died of cancer just seven months later, at the age of 64. In 1959 Congress dedicated the Taft Memorial Bell Tower on the Capitol grounds. That same year, his portrait was added to the Senate Reception Room, part of the Famous Five collection—perhaps the Senate's highest honor.

All Featured Biographies

        -  Contact 
        -  Leadership & Officers 
        -  Former Senators 
        -  Qualifications & Terms of Service 
        -  Facts & Milestones 
        -  States 

### Organizational Chart 

This chart shows the relationships among Senate leaders and officers who manage the flow of legislative and administrative business in the Senate.  

### Contact Your Senator 

Can't find your senator's name in the list of Senators?  Perhaps he or she is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, or a Senator in your State Legislature.

### Biographical Directory 

The Directory provides information about former and current senators.

### Related Art 

Robert A Taft
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                      NORTHERN STATES FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                      -------------------------------------


Section 906 Certification

         We hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this quarterly
report of Northern States Financial Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2004 (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 such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Northern States Financial
Corporation as of and for the periods covered by the Report.




Date: November 8, 2004                       By: /s/ Fred Abdula
      ----------------                       -----------------------------------
                                             Fred Abdula
                                             Chairman of the Board of
                                             Directors and President



Date: November 8, 2004                       By: /s/ Thomas M. Nemeth
      ----------------                       -----------------------------------
                                             Thomas M. Nemeth
                                             Vice President and Treasurer
MAINE	SUPREME	JUDICIAL	COURT Reporter	of	Decisions

Decision: 2020 ME	37

Docket: Cum-19-403

Submitted

On	Briefs: February	26,	2020

Decided: March	31,	2020

Panel: MEAD,	GORMAN,	JABAR,	HUMPHREY,	HORTON,	and	CONNORS,	JJ.

DAVID	F.	PAQUETTE

v.

DEPARTMENT	OF	CORRECTIONS

PER	CURIAM

[¶1]		Because	events	in	 the	Superior	Court	have	overtaken	 this	appeal,	

we	dismiss	it	as	moot.	

[¶2]	 	 David	 F.	 Paquette,	 an	 inmate	 in the custody	 of	 the	 Maine	

Department	of	Corrections,	filed	an	action	in	the	Superior	Court (Cumberland	

County) against	the	Department.		The	court	(Warren,	J.)	treated	the	action	as	a	

petition	 for	 review	 of	 agency action.	 	 See 5	 M.R.S.	 §§ 11001-11008	 (2018);	

M.R.	Civ.	P.	80C.		After	 the	court	issued	an	order	requiring	Paquette	 to	show	

cause	 why	 his	 appeal	 should	 not	 be	 dismissed	 for	 failure	 to	 serve	 the	

Department	 pursuant	 to	 5	 M.R.S.	 § 11003(1),	 Paquette	 filed	 documents	

showing	 unsuccessful	 attempts	 to	 serve	 the	 Attorney	 General	 but	 not	 the	

Department	itself.	
2

[¶3]		The	court	dismissed	Paquette’s	petition	 for	insufficient	service	of	

process.	 	 Paquette	 then	 filed	 a	 document	 making	 additional	 assertions	

regarding	his	service	efforts.		The	court	treated	that	filing	as	an	appeal.		

[¶4]		After	the	appeal	was	docketed	in	the	Law	Court,	Paquette	filed	in	

the	 trial	 court	 a	 motion	 to	 serve	 the	 Department	 by	 mail	 and	 documents	

asserting	 that	 the	 Department	 had	 acknowledged	 receipt	 of	 process.	 	 We	

entered	an	order	 that suspended	M.R.	App. P. 3(b)	 to	permit	 the	court	 to	act	

on	 Paquette’s	 assertions.	 	 The	 court	 revisited	 the	 service	 issue	 and	 granted	

Paquette	leave	to	effect	alternate	service.		See M.R.	Civ.	P.	4(g).

[¶5]	 	 The	 court	 has	 thus	 negated	 its	 dismissal	 of	 Paquette’s	 petition,	

rendering	this	appeal	moot.		Cf.	E.	Me.	Med.	Ctr.	v.	Me.	Health	Care	Fin.	Comm’n,	

601	A.2d	99,	101	(Me.	1992).	

The	entry	is:

Appeal	 dismissed.	 	 Remanded	 for	 further	

proceedings consistent	with	this	opinion.	

David	F.	Paquette,	appellant pro	se

Aaron	M.	Frey,	Attorney	General,	and	Jillian	R.	O’Brien,	Asst.	Atty.	Gen.,	Office	

of	the	Attorney	General,	Augusta,	for	appellee	Department	of	Corrections

Cumberland	County	Superior	Court	docket	number	CV-2018-510

FOR	CLERK	REFERENCE	ONLY
CONTINUATION AGREEMENT


         THIS CONTINUATION AGREEMENT is entered into by and between Lucent
Technologies, Inc., with a place of business at 211 Mt. Airy Rd., basking Ridge,
NJ 07920 (hereinafter called "LUCENT") and Spanlink Communications, Inc., with a
place of business at One Main Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414 (hereinafter
called "SPANLINK").

         WHEREAS, LUCENT has succeeded to the interest of American Telephone and
Telegraph Company ("AT&T") in and to that certain Software Modification
Agreement by and between AT&T and SPANLINK executed by both companies on May 4,
1993 and sometimes referred to as "Agreement No. SP1" (herein referred to as the
"1993 Agreement").

         WHEREAS, LUCENT and SPANLINK have entered into other agreements and
have other continuing business relationships subsequent to the 1993 Agreement
and desire to clarify and modify the terms on which the 1993 Agreement and
subsequent agreements and business arrangements between SPANLINK and LUCENT.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the agreements
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

         1. The 1993 Agreement shall remain in full force and effect with
respect to Existing Products and Modified Products as described therein except
as set forth in Paragraph 2 hereof.

         2. Exhibit B to the 1993 Agreement shall be modified by deleting
therefrom the section entitled "POST WARRANTY FEE". In lieu thereof, LUCENT and
SPANLINK agree that all post warranty support provided with respect to Existing
Products or Modified Products distributed pursuant to the 1993 Agreement shall
be on a time and materials basis at current rates and prices.

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

                                                   LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


                                                   By
                                                      --------------------------
                                                      Its
                                                          ----------------------

                                                   SPANLINK COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                                                   By /s/ Patrick P. Irestone
                                                          Its President and COO
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-2792
RICKY L. LEWIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusEDMOND J. MATKO, Prosecuting Attorney of Harrison County, and individually; J. W. MCGAHAN, as police officer for the City of Clarksburg, WV and individually; THOMAS A. BEDELL, Judge of Harrison County and parties unknown, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (CA-96-200-1) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 20, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky L. Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his complaint alleging violations under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983-1986 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court's op inion dismissing the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1994) as frivolous (current version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West Supp. 1997)), and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Lewis v. Matko , No. CA-96-200- 1 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 22, 1996). To the extent the order is unclear, the dismissal is without prejudice. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED