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

PICCARRETA DAVIS KEENAN FIDEL PC

2 East Congress Street, Suite 1000

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1782

(520) 622-6900

Michael L. Piccarreta 

State Bar No. 003962 

Email: mlp@pd-law.com

Attorney for Defendant Andrew Padilla

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff,

v.

6. Andrew Padilla,

 (Counts 1-51)

 Defendant.

NO. CR-18-00422-06-PHX-SPL

SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO REPLY TO 

RESPONSE (DOC. 476) TO MOTION TO 

DISMISS DUE TO GOVERNMENT 

INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO 

COUNSEL AND REQUEST FOR

DISCLOSURE OR, IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO 

WITHDRAW (DOC. 456)

(First Request)

Defendant Andrew Padilla, by and through his undersigned attorney, hereby 

supplements his Motion for Extension of Time to Reply to Response (Doc. 476) to Motion 

to Dismiss due to Government Interference with Right to Counsel and Request for 

Disclosure or, in the Alternative, Motion to Withdraw (Doc. 456). The government indicated 

that it would not oppose the request for extension of time due to the fact that undersigned 

counsel for Mr. Padilla has out of town travel plans for four days from Friday, March 1, 

2019, and returning on Tuesday, March 5, 2019. The defense supplements its request for the 

four day extension on the basis of undersigned counsel’s out of town travel plans. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 481 Filed 02/28/19 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

2

The government does not share Mr. Padilla’s view that its response raised factual and 

legal arguments beyond the scope of the initial motion and would not have agreed to an 

extension on that basis, and the government indicates that it opposes the request for extension 

of time to reply and requested that the email exchange be attached.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 28th day of February, 2019.

PICCARRETA DAVIS KEENAN FIDEL PC

By: /s/ Michael L. Piccarreta

Michael L. Piccarreta

Attorney for Defendant Andrew Padilla

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 28th day of February, 2019, I electronically 

transmitted the foregoing to the Clerk of the Court via the CM/ECF system for filing 

and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Reginald Jones: Reginald.Jones@usdoj.gov

Peter S. Kozinets: Peter.Kozinets@usdoj.gov

John Kucera: John.Kucera@usdoj.gov

Margaret Perlmeter: Margaret.Perlmeter@usdoj.gov

Kevin Rapp: Kevin.Rapp@usdoj.gov

Andrew Stone: Andrew.Stone@usdoj.gov

Thomas Bienert: tbienert@bmkattorneys.com

Paul Cambria: pcambira@lglaw.com

Robert Corn-Revere: bobcornrevere@dwt.com

Bruce Feder: bfeder@federlaw.com

James Grant: jimgrant@dwt.com

Michael D. Kimerer, mdk@kimerer.com

Gary Lincenberg: glincenberg@birdmarella.com

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 481 Filed 02/28/19 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Brian SHELTON, Appellant.

No. WD 40249.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 25, 1989.

Melinda K. Pendergraph, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SHANGLER, P.J., and TURNAGE and KENNEDY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Appeal from conviction for possession of over 35 grams of marijuana, § 195.010, RSMo 1986, and sentence of eight years imprisonment. Appeal from dismissal of motion under Rule 29.15 because the motion was not timely filed.

Judgement affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
Case 2:18-cv-00452-JJT   Document 14-1   Filed 04/30/18   Page 1 of 4

Case 2:18-cv-00452-JJT   Document 14-1   Filed 04/30/18   Page 2 of 4

Case 2:18-cv-00452-JJT   Document 14-1   Filed 04/30/18   Page 3 of 4

Case 2:18-cv-00452-JJT   Document 14-1   Filed 04/30/18   Page 4 of 4
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 26, 2010 

s0222 

Order 

 

February 26, 2010 

139821 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139821 

 COA: 280437 

Washtenaw CC: 06-001947-FC 

LUTHER WILLIAMS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 27, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32



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 IntelliCapital, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William Tay, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another 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/ William Tay

By: William Tay

Title: Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director



Dated: July 18, 2007
DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – PHOENIX

U.S. District Judge: Diane J. Humetewa Date: October 19, 2023

USA v. Michael Lacey, et al Case Number: CR-18-00422-PHX-DJH

Assistant U.S. Attorneys: Kevin Rapp, Austin Berry, Margaret Perlmeter, Andrew Stone, Peter 

Kozinets

Attorneysfor Defendants: Paul J. Cambria Jr., Retained for Defendant Lacey, present; Bruce S. Feder, 

Retained (Knapp) and Eric W. Kessler, CJA for Defendant Spear, present; Gary S. Lincenberg and Gopi 

K. Panchapakesan, Retained for Defendant Brunst, present; David S. Eisenberg, CJA for Defendant 

Padilla, present; Joy M. Bertrand, CJA for Defendant Vaught, present.

Defendants: ☒ Present ☐ Not Present ☒ Released ☐ Custody ☐ Summons ☐ Writ

JURY TRIAL (Day 21):

9:02 a.m. Court reconvenes. 9:04 a.m. Jury present. Daniel Hyer examined further. Exhibits 1150, 

1837, 27, 798, 40, and 109 are admitted. 10:31 a.m. Recess. 

10:51 a.m. Court reconvenes. Jury present. Witness examined further. Exhibits 1670a, 93, and 93a are 

admitted. 11:45 a.m. Cross-Examination by Mr. Feder. 12:01 p.m. Recess. 

1:01 p.m. Court reconvenes. 1:04 p.m. Jury present. Witness examined further. Exhibit 5934 is 

admitted. 2:20 p.m. Cross-Examination by Mr. Eisenberg. 2:37 p.m. Recess.

2:58 p.m. Court reconvenes. 3:00 p.m. Jury present. Witness examined further. Exhibit 90 is admitted. 

3:38 p.m. Cross-Examination by Ms. Bertrand. 4:08 p.m. Cross-Examination by Mr. Cambria. 4:10

p.m. No additional cross-examination and no redirect. Witness excused. Megan Lundstrom sworn and

examined. 4:28 p.m. Court in recess until Friday, October 20, 2023 at 9:00 a.m.

(Note: Courtroom Deputy’s review of the admitted exhibits for the duration of trial reveal omission of 

the admission of Exhibit 1238 on 9/21/2023 and Exhibit 1246 on 9/22/2023 in the minutes for those 

dates. Exhibit 1238 is deemed admitted on 9/21/2023 and Exhibit 1246 on 9/22/2023 as set forth on 

the record on those dates.)

Court Reporter Cathy Taylor/Christine Coaly

Deputy Clerk Liliana Figueroa

Start: 9:02 AM

Stop: 4:28 PM

Total: 5hrs 45min

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1878 Filed 10/19/23 Page 1 of 1
====================================================================================

UNITED STATESSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington, DC 20549

FORM 10-QSB/A-1

[X]
     Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2007OR[  ]
     Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934For the transition period from to


Commission file number 333-139986GEOSTAR MINERAL CORPORATION(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Nevada
     98-0516589(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
     (IRS Employer Identification No.)


706 - 15038 101 AvenueSurrey, British ColumbiaCanada V3R 0N2(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code.)(604) 687-3624(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

The Company is a Shell company: Yes [X] No [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [  ]

As of January 31, 2007, the Company had 5,000,000 shares of common stock outstanding.

====================================================================================



---

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 6.        EXHIBITS.

The following documents are included herein:

|Exhibit No. | Document Description                                                                    
|----------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|31.1        | Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to
|            | Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e), promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of      
|            | 1934, as amended.                                                                       
|           
|32.1        | Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of 
|            | the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer).   





SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this amended report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on this 17thday of July, 2007.

GEOSTAR MINERAL CORPORATIONBY:
     ANDRIY PROTSKIVAndriy Protskiv, President, Principal ExecutiveOfficer, Principal Financial Officer, PrincipalAccounting Officer, Secretary, Treasurer andDirector


















-2-

---
Exhibit 10.24


 


ASSURED
GUARANTY LTD.


 


DESCRIPTION
OF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CASH COMPENSATION


 


FOR 2009


 


Set
forth below are the 2009 annual salary of the Chief Executive Officer, the
Chief Financial Officer and each of the three other most highly compensated Executive
Officers.


 


Dominic J. Frederico


 


 President and Chief Executive
Officer, Assured Guaranty Ltd.


 


	
  Salary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  $

  	
  750,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 


Robert B. Mills


 


 Chief Financial
Officer, Assured Guaranty Ltd.


 


	
  Salary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  $

  	
  520,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 


Michael J. Schozer


 


 President, Assured
Guaranty Corp.


 


	
  Salary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  $

  	
  400,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 


James M. Michener


 


 General Counsel,
Assured Guaranty Ltd.


 


	
  Salary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  $

  	
  390,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 


Robert A. Bailenson


 


 Chief Accounting
Officer, Assured Guaranty Ltd.


 


	
  Salary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  $

  	
  350,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 

















 


In addition to salary, the named executive
officers will be eligible to be considered to receive cash bonuses for 2009
performance.  In 2009, the named
executive officers will receive perquisites and other annual compensation
including, employer contributions to retirement plans, tax preparation services,
financial planning services, club fees, business related spousal travel, and
executive health benefits.  In 2009, Mr. Frederico
and Mr. Michener will receive Bermuda housing allowances, Bermuda housing
tax gross-ups, FICA reimbursement, Bermuda car allowances and Bermuda family
travel.
**EXHIBIT 32.02**

**Section 1350 Certification**

In connection with thisquarterly report of ML APM Global Commodity FuturesAccess LLC (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the SecuritiesExchange Commission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Barbra E. Kocsis,Chief Financial Officer of Merrill Lynch Alternative Investments LLC, themanager of ML APM Global Commodity FuturesAccess LLC, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

1. This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2. The informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  May 15, 2007                      |                  |
|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|                                          |
| By                                            | /s/ BARBRA E.  KOCSIS |   |
| Barbra E. Kocsis                              |
| Chief Financial  Officer                      |
| (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|                                               |                       |  |  |

 

1

----
Page 1

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

29

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States,

Plaintiff,

v.

Joye Vaught,

Defendant.

 Case No. CR-18-422-DJH

ORDER

Upon Motion of the Defendant, with good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Joye Vaught leave to appear by 

[phone/videoconferencing] at the August 4, 2023 hearing in this matter. Details 

for the remote appearance will be emailed to Ms. Vaught’s counsel, Joy Bertrand.

SO ORDERED this _______ day of ___________, 2023.

______________________

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1671-1 Filed 08/04/23 Page 1 of 1
# United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted August 18, 2005 Decided July 24, 2006 Before Hon. JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge Hon. KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

No. 03-1516 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. BETTE J. PREE, also known as BETTS PREE, Defendant-Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois. No. 02 CR 30004 Jeanne E. Scott, Judge.

**O R D E R** Bette J. Pree was indicted on one count of failing to file a tax return for the tax year 1994, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203, and on two counts of filing false tax returns for the tax years 1995 and 1996, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1). A jury acquitted her of the failure-to-file charge but found her guilty on both counts of falsifying her two subsequent tax returns. The district court sentenced her to 18 months’ imprisonment, the low end of the range as recommended by the then-mandatory United States Sentencing Guidelines, to be followed by one year of supervised release. Relying on Guidelines § 5E1.1, the court also ordered, as a condition of her supervised release, that Ms. Pree pay taxes owed to the IRS in the amount of $38,852. See U.S.S.G. § 5E1.1. UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53No. 03-1516 Page 2

While Ms. Pree’s first appeal to this court remained pending, the Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), rendering the Sentencing Guidelines advisory. Retaining jurisdiction, we remanded Ms. Pree’s case to ask whether the district court would have imposed the same condition of tax repayment upon Ms. Pree’s supervised release had it understood the Guidelines to be advisory rather than mandatory. See United States v. Paladino , 401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir. 2005). In an order entered July 28, 2005, the district court replied that, were it required to resentence Ms. Pree, it would not have imposed the same condition of supervised release. Accordingly, pursuant to Paladino , we vacate Ms. Pree’s sentence and remand to the district court for resentencing.
#### James F. LUTES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 51466.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 26, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 30, 1996.

Larry Curtis Pace, Kansas City, for Appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., David G. Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for Respondent.

Before FENNER, C.J., P.J., LOWENSTEIN and SMART, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from judgment of motion court denying motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 32


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 UV Flu Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period March 31, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of
the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such
officer’s 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 the Company.




Date:
      August 16, 2010
                  /s/
      John J. LennonName:
                  John
      J. LennonTitle:
                  President,
      Chief Financial Officer and Chairman of the Board(Principal
      Executive Officer)/s/
      John J. LennonName:
                  John
      J. LennonTitle:
                  President,
      Chief Financial Officer and Chairman of the Board(Principal
      Financial Officerand
      Principal Accounting
Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50221

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DAVID DURAN-ARIAS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-2045

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Duran-Arias pleaded guilty to one count of being found in the 

United States following deportation. The district court denied Duran-Arias’s 

request for a downward departure or variance and sentenced him within the 

advisory guidelines range to 24 months in prison, to be followed by a threeyear term of nonreporting supervised release. Duran-Arias argues on appeal 

that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to argue at 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 13, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50221 Document: 00513270249 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/13/2015
No. 15-50221

2

sentencing the points that were raised in the defense sentencing 

memorandum, failing to request specific relief, and failing to object on the 

record at sentencing to preserve Duran-Arias’s appellate arguments. In 

addition, Duran-Arias complains that his trial counsel’s reference to his client’s 

alcohol addiction in the request for a below-guidelines sentence constituted 

ineffective assistance because it was an improper basis for a downward 

departure under the Sentencing Guidelines.

This court generally does not review claims of ineffective assistance of 

counsel on direct appeal. United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), 

cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014). We have “undertaken to resolve claims of 

inadequate representation on direct appeal only in rare cases where the record 

allowed us to evaluate fairly the merits of the claim.” United States v. Higdon, 

832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987). In most instances, we qualify a claim as a 

“rare case” warranting review only when it was raised and developed in a posttrial motion to the district court. United States v. Stevens, 487 F.3d 232, 245 

(5th Cir. 2007). Duran-Arias did not raise these ineffective assistance claims 

in the district court at any time. Because the record is not sufficiently 

developed to allow for a fair consideration of these claims, we decline to 

consider them on direct appeal without prejudice to Duran-Arias’s right to 

raise them on collateral review. See Isgar, 739 F.3d at 841. Accordingly, the 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-50221 Document: 00513270249 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/13/2015
Directors' Compensation



 EXHIBIT 10.19 
 HURON CONSULTING GROUP INC. 
 DIRECTORS’ COMPENSATION FOR 2008 AND 2009 
 SUMMARY SHEET 
  

							
	 	  	2008	  	2009
	 Cash Compensation
	  			  		
	 Annual Board Retainer (1)
	  	$	50,000	  	$	60,000
			
	 Annual Committee Chairmanship Retainer (1):
	  			  		
	 Audit Committee
	  	$	10,000	  	$	10,000
	 Compensation Committee
	  	$	7,500	  	$	7,500
	 Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
	  	$	7,500	  	$	7,500
			
	 Board Meeting Fee (per meeting)
	  	$	1,000	  	$	1,000
			
	 Committee Meeting Fee (per meeting)
	  	$	1,000	  	$	1,000
			
	 Equity Compensation
	  			  		
	 Grant of Restricted Common Stock Upon Appointment (2)
	  	$	400,000	  	$	400,000
			
	 Annual Grant of Restricted Common Stock (3) 
	  	$	160,000	  	$	170,000

  

	(1)	Annual retainers are paid in four equal installments and are prorated to reflect the portion of the year that the director serves on the board. 

  

	(2)	Upon appointment to the board, independent directors will be granted shares of restricted common stock with an aggregate fair value of $400,000, based on the closing stock price on
the date immediately preceding the date of appointment. Such shares will vest over the following twelve quarters. 

  

	(3)	On the date of our 2008 annual meeting of stockholders, each independent director was granted shares of restricted common stock with an aggregate fair value of $160,000. On the date
of our 2009 annual meeting of stockholders, each independent director will be granted shares of restricted common stock with an aggregate fair value of $170,000. The number of shares granted is based on the closing stock price on the date
immediately preceding the date of the annual meeting and vest over the following twelve quarters.