alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment 2 to Employment Agreement - Steven J. Demetriou



 Exhibit 10.4.1 
 Amendment 2 of Employment Agreement 
 Mr. Steven Demetriou (the
“Executive”) and Aleris International, Inc. (the “Company”) and for certain purposes Aleris Corporation (the “Parent”) formerly Aleris Holding Company entered into an agreement dated June 1, 2010 as amended by a
letter dated April 5, 2011 (the “Agreement”). 
 The Executive, Company and Parent desire to amend the Agreement
effective immediately prior to the effectiveness of the 2011 initial public offering of Parent as follows: 
 1. Clause
(ii) of the first sentence of Section 3 is amended by replacing the words “twelve (12) months” with “thirty (30) days.” 
 2. Section 5(a)(i)(C)(2) is amended by replacing the words after “(B)” with “two (2).” 
 3. The last paragraph of Section 5(a)(i) is amended to read as follows: “For purposes of this Agreement, the Severance Period shall mean two (2) years.” 

4. The last sentences of Sections 5(a)(ii) and (d) shall be amended to add at the end thereof the following: 

“; provided, further, however, notwithstanding the foregoing, if termination of employment is in anticipation of or within twelve
(12) months following a Change of Control (as defined in the Aleris Corporation 2011 Equity Incentive Plan), the Severance Payment will be paid in a cash lump sum within thirty (30) days following the Date of Termination, to the extent
permissible under the rules regarding a “short term deferral” within the meaning of Treasury Regulations Section 1.409A-1(b)(4) of the Code and “separation pay plans” within the meaning of Treasury Regulations
Section 1.409A-1(b)(9) of the Code or otherwise not subject Executive to taxes under Section 409A of the Code. For purposes of the foregoing, a termination of employment will be deemed to be “in anticipation of” a Change of
Control if such termination is for the principal purpose of avoiding or evading the Company’s or Parent’s compensation obligations that would arise upon a termination following a Change of Control.” 

5. Section 5(d) is amended by replacing the words “twelve (12)” with “twenty (24)” in the two places it appears
and to add after “(ii)” the following “the product of (x) two times (y)”. 
 6. Except as expressly
amended by this letter agreement, the Agreement shall otherwise continue in full force and effect. 
  
 8147629.5 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written
above. 
  

	
	Executive
	
	  
	Steven J. Demetriou


  

			
	Aleris International, Inc.
	
	 
	By:	 	Christopher R. Clegg
	Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary



 

	
	Aleris Corporation
	
	  
	Christopher R. Clegg
	Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary



  
 2 


 8147629.5
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           8,670
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 9,700
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     39,998
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          33,683
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            33,251
<LOANS>                                        138,667
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,949
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 236,625
<DEPOSITS>                                     196,267
<SHORT-TERM>                                     3,520
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                398
<LONG-TERM>                                      7,576
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,847
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,017
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 236,625
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  9,458
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,759
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   410
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                12,627
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,646
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,110
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            6,517
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      180
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,904
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,912
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,912
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,219
<EPS-BASIC>                                     3.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.97
<LOANS-NON>                                        276
<LOANS-PAST>                                       245
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,851
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      134
<RECOVERIES>                                        52
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,949
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,949
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          45,371
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,153
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   470
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    381,187
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         267,216
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           252,416
<LOANS>                                        630,084
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,931
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,403,436
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,018,370
<SHORT-TERM>                                   188,984
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             28,178
<LONG-TERM>                                     85,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,430
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,403,436
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 35,984
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               26,572
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    49
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                62,605
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              24,655
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,486
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           27,119
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      800
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (113)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 27,589
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,380
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,153
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,153
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.03
<LOANS-NON>                                      6,342
<LOANS-PAST>                                       567
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    98
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  4,517
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 7,222
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,584
<RECOVERIES>                                       493
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,931
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,931
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            941


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13164-13165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5856]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[CA-010-03-1110-01]


Seasonal Visitation Restriction Order for the Carrizo Plain 
Natural Area

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Establishment of a seasonal visitation restriction order on 
public lands within the Carrizo Plain Natural Area of the Caliente 
Resource Area, Bakersfield District, CA.

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

SUMMARY: This emergency action restricts public access on BLM-
administered rock outcrops within the Carrizo Plain Natural Area due to 
the presence of sensitive species of birds of prey during a critical 
part of their life cycle, and restricts vehicular use of certain roads 
due to seasonal fire hazard. The public lands affected by this 
restriction are located within Kern and San Luis Obispo counties, 
California.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective March 13, 1995, and pursuant to 43 
CFR 8360 and 43 CFR 8364.1(a), all visitation within 0.25 miles of any 
rock outcrop in the vicinity of and including Painted Rock is unlawful. 
This prohibition includes all outcrops within public lands in T32S, 
R20E, Sections 8, 16 and 17, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. Access 
shall be limited to persons carrying written permission from the 
Authorized Officer, or those participating in an authorized guided 
tour.
    Pursuant to 43 CFR 8360 and 43 CFR 8364.1(a), roads presenting a 
fire hazard due to vegetation growth will be closed to vehicle use 
during the dry fire season. All such roads will be posted with 
appropriate signs to advise of the closure. This Seasonal Visitation 
Restriction Order will be in effect until June 30, 1995 for the Painted 
Rock area, and on an as needed basis for the road closures, generally 
from June 1 until September 30. [[Page 13165]] 
    This emergency visitor restriction is necessary in order to limit 
disturbance to nesting birds of prey to a level compatible with 
successful nesting while allowing for educational and recreational use; 
and to reduce accidental fires caused by vehicle travel on roads 
overgrown with vegetation. Maps of the affected area, and information 
concerning guided tours, are available from the Caliente Resource Area 
Office, 3801 Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, California 93308-6837.
    Bureau of Land Management employees and Carrizo Plain cooperators 
are exempt from this order while in the course of their official 
duties.
    Any person failing to comply with this restriction order may be 
subject to a fine not to exceed $1,000 and/or imprisonment not to 
exceed 12 months. Penalties are contained in 43 CFR 8360.0-7.

    Dated: March 2, 1995.
Steve Larson,
Acting Area Manager, Caliente Resource Area.
[FR Doc. 95-5856 Filed 3-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3827

Knowles Corporation:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests and the 

request failed to show that this particular product is available only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2292

Quest Technologies dba Crystal Quest:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-11067, 333-15907, 333-17021, Amendment No. 1 to 333-23035, 333-37247,
333-37383, 333-41603, 333-58045, 333-68505, 333-76379, 333-76757, 333-82134,
333-82569, 333-84419, 333-88813, 333-88819, Amendment No. 1 to 333-91621,
333-115693, 333-115694, Amendment No. 1 to 333-120373, and 333-139349 on Form
S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-07241, 333-11237, 333-28449, 333-74461,
333-79737, 333-105882, 333-125605, and 333-135118 on Form S-8 of our reports
dated February 28, 2007, relating to the consolidated financial statements and
consolidated financial statement schedule of General Growth Properties, Inc. and
subsidiaries and management's report on the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
General Growth Properties, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chicago, Illinois
February 28, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7504]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
[T.D. 95-23]


Revocation of Customs Broker Licenses

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: General notice.

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

SUMAMRY: Notice is hereby given that on March 7, 1995, the following 
Customs broker licenses were revoked by operation of law due to the 
failure of the broker to file the triennial status report as required 
by 19 CFR 111.30(d). These licenses were issued in the Los Angeles 
Customs district.

Christopher Carle--10478
Lisa Crum--11775
Mark Dawson--7156
Troy Erickson--12605
Hadassah Foster--12628
Joel Meyer--5801
Janice Powell--11831
Kelly Reed--13210
Charlene Stecher--6210
Horace Taylor--2897
Robert Waggoner--2710
Susan Yoshinaga--10596

    Hence, the subject licenses are revoked.

    Dated: March 21, 1995.
Philip Metzger,
Director, Trade Compliance Division.
[FR Doc. 95-7504 Filed 3-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-M
Exhibit 10.5   Execution Copy
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT Agreement A-MARK PRECIOUS METALS, INC., Company RAND LeSHAY, Mr. LeShay
 STATEMENTS OF FACT:
 Existing Agreement
  NOW, THEREFORE, Company and Mr. LeShay hereby agree as follows:
 Employment; Term
 Duties
  Employment
Agreement 




---



##### 



Compensation Base Salary Signing
Payment Percentage Bonus
    Employment
Agreement 




---



##### 



Stock Appreciation Right Exhibit A
 Benefits.
   Termination
  Totally Disabled
 Cause
 Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



nolo contendere
    6(c)(5)
   Compensation Following Termination Prior to the End of the Term
  Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



Proprietary Information
  proprietary information
    Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



Surrender of Records
 Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



Intellectual Property
 Confidentiality
 Enforcement
 Notices
 Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



If to Company,
to:A-MARK PRECIOUS METALS, INC.c/o Spectrum Numismatics International, Inc.18022 Cowan, Suite 105Irvine, California 92614Attention: Gregory N. RobertsWith a copy to:KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP1177 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, New York 10036Attention: Scott S. Rosenblum, Esq.and a copy to:FRYE & HSIEH, LLP24955 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite A201Malibu, California 90265Attention: Douglas Frye, Esq.If to
Mr. LeShay, to:RAND LESHAYWith a copy to:Attention:
 Assignability; Binding Effect
 Employment Agreement 




---



##### 



Complete Understanding
 Amendments;
Waivers
 Severability
 Survivability
 Governing Law
 Binding Arbitration
 Employment
Agreement 




---



##### 



[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]
 Employment
Agreement 




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 CompanyA-MARK PRECIOUS METALS, INC.
A New York CorporationBy:
    
    /s/ Greg RobertName:
Title:
    
    GREG ROBERT
CEOMr. LeShay/s/ Rand LeShayRAND LeSHAY, individually
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Timothy Holmes, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), rendered November 9, 1988, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6188
JOSEPH EDWARD WAGES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEOTIS BECK; NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CA-96-13-6) Submitted: June 19, 1997 Decided: June 30, 1997 Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Edward Wages, Appellant Pro Se. Rebecca Kendrick Cleveland, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. 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 petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court'sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Wages v. Beck , No. CA-96-13-6 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 29, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### J. E. WINSLOW COMPANY, Incorporated, v. R. J. CUTLER.

(Filed 20 September, 1933.)

Claim and Delivery C c — Motion for sale of property pending trial held addressed to discretion of court.

Plaintiff took possession of certain mules from defendant by claim and delivery and the execution of the statutory bond, and moved that the mules be sold and the proceeds of sale held pending the determination of the issue of title between the parties. *Helct,*even if the court had the power to order the sale of the mules over defendant’s objection, the motion was addressed to the discretion of the court, and the court’s refusal of the motion is not reviewable.

*207Appeal by plaintiff from *Barnhill, J.,*at May Term, 1933, of Beau-poet.

Affirmed.

This is an action to recover from tbe defendant possession of two mules which had been sold by the plaintiff to- the defendant, and which had been conveyed by the defendant to the plaintiff by a chattel mortgage to secure a note for the balance due on the purchase price for said mules. In his answer, the defendant denied that plaintiff was entitled to recover the possession of the said mules.

At the date of the commencement of the action, the mules described in the complaint were taken from the possession of the defendant by the sheriff of Beaufort County, under a writ of claim and delivery, and delivered to the plaintiff, who had filed in the action the undertaking-required by statute.

While the action was pending for trial, the plaintiff moved for an order that the mules be sold by a commissioner appointed by the court, and that the proceeds of the sale be held awaiting the trial of the issues raised by the pleadings. This motion was denied, and plaintiff excepted and appealed to the Supreme Court.

*Ward & Grimes for plaintiff.*

*W. A. Thompson for defendant.*

Pee CuRiam.

There was no error in the refusal of the judge to allow plaintiff’s motion.

Even if the judge had the power to allow the motion, over the objection of defendant, its exercise was within the discretion of the judge and for that reason is not subject to review by this Court on plaintiff’s appeal. The appeal must be

Dismissed.