alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.45
  
  st
 Pension:
    
    Clause 6.2 of your March 2007 Service Agreement with Galileo International Limited (now
Travelport International Limited) (the Service Agreement) is deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:The Company operates a defined contribution pension plan. While the
Executive remains eligible for the Group Personal Pension Plan (or another
personal pension plan of the Executives choosing or the equivalent cash
compensation), the Companys contributions are capped at the lesser of (a)
15% of the Executives then-current annual base salary (currently £500,000
under Clause 5.1.1 of the Service Agreement) or (b) the maximum amount of
the annual allowance permitted by HM Revenue & Customs without additional
tax (i.e. £50,000 per annum for the 2011-2012 tax year), to be contributed
monthly by the Company. The Company pension scheme is contracted in to
the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme and National Insurance
contributions are payable accordingly.Cash Allowance:
    
    You will receive a per annum cash allowance in an amount equal to (a) 15% of your
then-current annual base salary minus (b) the Companys pension contribution under Clause 6.2
of the Service Agreement (as amended herein), less all required deductions and withholdings,
to be paid monthly. For the 2011-2012 tax year, based on your current base annual salary of
£500,000, this annual cash allowance will be £25,000 ((£500,000 x 15%)  £50,000). For the
avoidance of doubt, this amount is not part of your annual base salary and therefore shall not
be used as the basis for calculating bonus (including under Clause 8.1 of the Service
Agreement), the termination payment under Clause 9.1 of the Service Agreement, pension under
Clause 6.2 of the Service Agreement (as amended herein) or any other entitlements.




---



##### 



Lee Golding
Executive Vice President, Human Resources  Attorney-in-Fact, Travelport International Limited
  Signature
    
    /s/ Gordon WilsonDate
    
    29 March 2011
#### Henry Mowers, Respondent, v. Emory B. Pottle, Appellant.

— Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered before a new referee, with costs to.abide the event; appeal f»*om the order dismissed, without costs. Opinion by

Mer-win, J.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

Robert A. Julian (SBN 88469)

Cecily A. Dumas (SBN 111449)

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

600 Montgomery Street, Suite 3100

San Francisco, CA 94111-2806

Telephone: 415-659-2900

Facsimile: 415-659-2601

Email: rjulian@bakerlaw.com

Email: cdumas@bakerlaw.com

Eric E. Sagerman (SBN 155496)

David J. Richardson (SBN 168592)

Lauren T. Attard (SBN 320898) 

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

11601 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1400

Los Angeles, CA 90025

Telephone: 310.820.8800

Facsimile: 310.820.8859

Email: esagerman@bakerlaw.com

Email: drichardson@bakerlaw.com

Email: lattard@bakerlaw.com

Counsel for Official Committee of Tort Claimants

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Debtors.

Case No. 19-30088-(DM)

Chapter 11

(Lead Case)

(Jointly Administered)

NOTICE OF SUBPOENA ISSUED TO

ACRT PACIFIC, LLC; ACRT, INC.; 

ARBORMETRICS SOLUTIONS, 

LLC;ARBORWORKS, INC., 

ASPLUNDH TREE EXPERT 

COMPANY; BURNS & MCDONNELL 

ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC; 

CALIFORNIA FORESTRY AND 

VEGETATION MANAGEMENT, INC; 

CN UTILITY CONSULTING, INC.; 

DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP; AND 

DAVEYTREE EXPERT COMPANY

□ Affects PG& E Corporation

□ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company

■ Affects both Debtors

*All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case,

No. 19-30088 (DM)

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5345 Filed: 01/10/20 Entered: 01/10/20 15:13:20 Page 1 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

- 2 -

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on or about January 9, 2020, counsel for the Official 

Committee of Tort Claimants (“TCC”) issued and intends to serve subpoenas to produce 

documents, information, and/or objects (the “Production Subpoenas”) on the entities identified 

below. Copies of the Production Subpoenas are attached hereto as follows:

• Exhibit 1 – ACRT Pacific, LLC

• Exhibit 2 – ACRT, Inc.

• Exhibit 3 – ArborMetrics Solutions, LLC

• Exhibit 4 – ArborWorks, Inc. 

• Exhibit 5 – Asplundh Tree Expert Company

• Exhibit 6 – Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc.

• Exhibit 7 – California Forestry and Vegetation Management, Inc. 

• Exhibit 8 – CN Utility Consulting, Inc. 

• Exhibit 9 – Davey Resource Group

• Exhibit 10 – Davey Tree Expert Company

The items requested to be produced in the Production Subpoenas are described in 

Exhibit A to each of the Production Subpoenas.

Dated: January 10, 2020 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

By: /s/ David J. Richardson

Robert A. Julian

Cecily A. Dumas

David J. Richardson

Attorneys for The Official Committee of Tort 

Claimants

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 10, 2020, the foregoing was been served upon all parties 

or their attorneys in a manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(1).

/s/ David J. Richardson

David J. Richardson

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5345 Filed: 01/10/20 Entered: 01/10/20 15:13:20 Page 2 of

2
EXHIBIT 10.49



AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR EXECUTIVE
SERVICES



This AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR
EXECUTIVE SERVICES (this Amendment) is entered into this 20th day of January 2003, and effective as of February 1, 2003, by and between Sagent Technology, Inc. and Andre M. Boisvert with respect to that certain Agreement For Executive
Services between the parties dated September 1, 2002 (the Agreement).



1.    Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.



2.    The parties agree to extend the Services Term from July 31, 2003 to July 31, 2004.



3.    The Company agrees to
change the Termination Payment from $240,000 USD to $480,000 USD.



4.    The Company agrees that the Executive will be entitled to a $350,000 USD retention bonus payable on the earlier of a) termination of Executives employment without cause or, b) change in
control, or c) July 31, 2004.



5.    The Company agrees to guarantee Executive 160 hours per month for an aggregate of $40,000 a month in base compensation.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, for and in consideration of the premises and of the promises exchanged herein, the sufficiency of which
is hereby acknowledged, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first set forth above. This Amendment was ratified during a telephonic board meeting which was held on January 16, 2002 at 4:00 pm PST.





|                                                                                                                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|SAGENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. Board of Directors  /s/    Ali JenabAli Jenab  /s/    John ZickerJohn Zicker  /s/    Irv LichtenwaldIrv Lichtenwald  /s/    Steve SpringsteelSteve Springsteel
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5483 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to continue the national security 

exemption from emissions regulations when an excess Department of 

Defense vehicle covered by the exemption is transferred to a firefighting 

agency in a State or to any other State agency. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 

Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas (for himself, Mr. HANNA, Mr. BRIDENSTINE, Mr. 

AMODEI, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. COTTON, Mr. REICHERT, Mrs. 

LUMMIS, and Mr. POMPEO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to continue the 

national security exemption from emissions regulations 

when an excess Department of Defense vehicle covered 

by the exemption is transferred to a firefighting agency 

in a State or to any other State agency. 

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 ‘‘Firefighter Equipment 

5 Protection Act of 2014’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5483 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONTINUATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY EMIS2 SIONS EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN DEPART3 MENT OF DEFENSE VEHICLE TRANSFERS. 

4 (a) CONTINUATION OF EMISSIONS EXEMPTION UPON

5 TRANSFER.—Section 2576b of title 10, United States 

6 Code, is amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub8 section (e); and 

9 (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol10 lowing new subsection (d): 

11 ‘‘(d) CONTINUATION OF EMISSIONS EXEMPTION

12 UPON TRANSFER.—Personal property transferred under 

13 the authority of this section or through the Federal Excess 

14 Personal Property (FEPP) program or the Firefighter 

15 Property program (FFP) that qualified for a national se16 curity exemption under section 89.908 of title 40, Code 

17 of Federal Regulations, shall maintain this exemption even 

18 after the personal property is transferred to a firefighting 

19 agency in a State or to another State agency.’’. 

20 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Subsection (d) of section 

21 2576b of title 10, United States Code, as added by sub22 section (a)(2), shall apply to personal property described 

23 in such subsection (d) and transferred under such section 

24 or through the Federal Excess Personal Property program 

25 or the Firefighter Property program after July 1, 2014. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### William H. Abell, Respondent, v. Naomi Clark and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed.

Opinion by

Corlett, J.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5256 

To encourage compensation transparency. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2014 

Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS (for herself, Mrs. CAPITO, Ms. JENKINS, Mrs. 

ELLMERS, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. VALADAO, Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. GRANGER, Mrs. LUMMIS, and Mr. FITZPATRICK) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 

Workforce 

A BILL 

To encourage compensation transparency. 

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 ‘‘Stop Discrimination 

5 in the Workplace Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT OF EQUAL PAY ACT RE7 QUIREMENTS. 

8 Section 15(a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 

9 1938 (29 U.S.C. 215(a)) is amended— 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5256 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at 

2 the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

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

4 ‘‘(6) to discharge or in any other manner retali5 ate against any employee because such employee has 

6 inquired about, discussed, or disclosed comparative 

7 compensation information for the purpose of deter8 mining whether the employer is compensating an 

9 employee in a manner that provides equal pay for 

10 equal work, except that this paragraph shall not 

11 apply to instances in which an employee who has ac12 cess to the wage information of other employees as 

13 a part of such employee’s job functions discloses the 

14 wages of such other employees to an individual who 

15 does not otherwise have access to such information, 

16 unless such disclosure is in response to a charge or 

17 complaint or in furtherance of an investigation, pro18 ceeding, hearing, or action under section 6(d), in19 cluding an investigation conducted by the employer. 

20 Nothing in paragraph (6) shall be construed to limit the 

21 rights of an employee provided under any other provision 

22 of law.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5462 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5462

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 18, 2014

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
            the fees charged to passengers of air carriers.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FEES CHARGED TO PASSENGERS OF AIR CARRIERS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (c) of section 44940 of title 49, 
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Limitation on Fee.--
            ``(1) Amount.--Fees imposed under subsection (a)(1) shall 
        be $5.60 per one-way trip in air transportation or intrastate 
        air transportation that originates at an airport in the United 
        States, except that the fee imposed per round trip shall not 
        exceed $11.20.
            ``(2) Definition of round trip.--In this subsection, the 
        term `round trip' means a trip on an air travel itinerary that 
        terminates or has a stopover at the origin point (or co-
        terminal).''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to a trip in air transportation or intrastate air 
transportation that is purchased on or after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 17, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 4279    Filed: 10/18/19    Entered: 10/18/19 12:13:44    Page 1 of2

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 4279    Filed: 10/18/19    Entered: 10/18/19 12:13:44    Page 2 of2
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 236 (Friday, December 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 63070]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29938]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-289]


GPU Nuclear Corporation; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for 
Amendment to Facility Operating License

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
a request by GPU Nuclear Corporation (the licensee) to withdraw its May 
20, 1994, application for an amendment to Facility Operating License 
No. DPR-50, issued to the licensee for operation of the Three Mile 
Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2, located in Dauphin County, 
Pennsylvania. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of this amendment was 
published in the Federal Register on June 14, 1994 (59 FR 30621).
    The purpose of the licensee's amendment request was to revise the 
Technical Specifications to raise the limit on maximum control rod drop 
time and was requested only for the duration of operating cycle 10, 
which was concluded on September 8, 1995.
    Subsequently the licensee informed the staff that the amendment is 
no longer required. Thus, the amendment application is considered to be 
withdrawn by the licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the 
application for amendment dated May 20, 1994, and (2) the staff's 
letter dated November 14, 1995.
    These documents are available for public inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
NW., Washington, DC and at the Law/Government Publications Section, 
State Library of Pennsylvania, (REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Walnut Street and 
Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, PA 17105.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of November 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ronald W. Hernan,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-29938 Filed 12-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### Solomon Unger, Appellant, v. Frederick C. Behmes and another, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Opinion by

Boardman, J.
#### ALFRED H. COLVARD, GRAHAM COUNTY et al. v. C. M. DICUS and J. P. DICUS, Trading as DICUS BROTHERS.

(Filed 22 January, 1930.)

Appeal and Error J c — Judgment supported by findings of fact supported by evidence is conclusive.

Upon jury trial being waived under an agreement tbat the judge should find the facts, his judgment thereon is conclusive on appeal when the evidence supports the facts upon which the judgment was entered.

Civil actioN, before *McElroy, J.,*at Fall Term, 1929, of Geaham.

*Morphew & Morphew and R. L. Phillips for plaintiff.*

*T. N. Jenlcins and Alley & Alley for defendant.*

*271Pee Cubiam.

A jury trial was waived and the trial judge found the facts and entered judgment thereon. There was evidence to support the findings of fact, and the facts found support the judgment. In such event the findings of fact and the judgment thereon are conclusive. *Eley v. R. R.,*165 N. C., 78, 80 S. E., 1064; *Holmes Electric Co. v. Carolina Power and Light Co.,*197 N. C., 766.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Reese Baglole, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Madrona Ventures Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
     statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
     make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
     statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
     this annual report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this annual report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the registrant, including its
          consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
          entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report
          is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
23rd day of October, 2007.


/s/ Reese Baglole
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1



Certifications



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months period ended April 2, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |     |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 16, 2005 |  | By: |  | /S/ ROBERT S. VOR BROKER             
|                   |  |     |  | Robert S. Vor Broker                 
|                   |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer and President



The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 32.2



Certifications



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months and six months periods ended July 3, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |     |  |                                                     
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ BRYANT P. BYNUM                                 
|                      |  |     |  | Bryant P. Bynum                                     
|                      |  |     |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.