alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                             OF THE
                    ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                     OF PALACE CASINOS, INC.

    The undersigned hereby submits these Articles of Amendment of the Articles
of Incorporation of Palace Casinos, Inc., a Utah corporation, pursuant to Utah
Cod Annotated, Section 16-10a-1006.

    1.    The name of the corporation is Palace Casinos, Inc.

    2.    The corporation's Articles of Incorporation are amended so that
ARTICLE ONE is restated to read in its entirety as follows:

                           ARTICLE ONE
                          CORPORATE NAME

        The name of the Corporation is Xcel Management, Inc.

    3.    The amendment was adopted by the shareholders of the corporation on
August 3, 1999, at a special meeting of shareholders held on that date (the
"meeting").

    4.    The corporation has only one class of voting shares that being
common shares.  There are no separate voting groups within that class.  The
corporation has 1,800,000 common shares outstanding all of which were entitled
to appear and vote at the meeting.  Of the total common shares outstanding,
1,620,000 were represented at the meeting, all of which voted in favor of the
amendment.

    These Articles of Amendment are hereby executed upon the affirmation of
the undersigned under penalty of perjury that the facts stated in this
instrument are true and that the execution hereof is the act of the
corporation as of this 11th day of August, 1999.


                             /s/ Steve Rippon

                            Steve Rippon, President
Exhibit 10.21

Summary Description of Commission Compensation  of Senior Vice President of World-Wide Sales for  FEI COMPANY

FEI Company's Vice President World-Wide Sales is also an executive officer of FEI. In addition to base-pay, eligibility for participation
in FEI's management bonus plan and equity-based compensation, the Senior Vice President of World-Wide Sales is eligible for a commission on system bookings. The commission payment for the
Senior Vice President of World-Wide Sales is based on a percentage of total company system bookings for the fiscal year. He is also assigned a quota based on targeted total system
bookings. For any systems bookings above100% of quota, an increased commission percentage is paid.

---



QuickLinks
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: September 15, 2016 522144 

________________________________

In the Matter of ANDRE BOYD, 

Petitioner,

v

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as Acting

Commissioner of Corrections

and Community Supervision, 

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: August 8, 2016

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ.

__________

Andre Boyd, Woodbourne, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J.

Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this

Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Sullivan County)

to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty

of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to

challenge a tier III determination finding him guilty of

violating a prison disciplinary rule. The Attorney General has

advised this Court that the determination has since been

administratively reversed, all references thereto have been

expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the mandatory

$5 surcharge has been refunded to petitioner's inmate account. 

Given that petitioner has received all of the relief to which he

is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter

of James v Prack, 137 AD3d 1390, 1391 [2016]; Matter of Roye v
-2- 522144 

Annucci, 137 AD3d 1392, 1393 [2016]). 

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ.,

concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without

costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

STEVEN HAUBENSTRICKER, 

Plaintiff,

Civil No. 08-15218

Hon. John Feikens 

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant. 

________________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, filed on

9/28/2009, and noted that no objections were filed by either party, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Report is accepted and entered as the findings and

conclusions of this court. 

s/John Feikens 

John Feikens

United States District Judge

Dated: October 22, 2009

2:08-cv-15218-JF-CEB Doc # 16 Filed 10/22/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 228
2

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of record

by electronic means or U.S. Mail on October 22,

2009.

s/Carol Cohron 

Deputy Clerk

2:08-cv-15218-JF-CEB Doc # 16 Filed 10/22/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 229
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 150 (Monday, August 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 45220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17815]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8700-5]


Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection 
Restrictions; Petition for Exemption--Class I Hazardous Waste 
Injection; Solutia, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Final Decisions on No Migration Petition Reissuances.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that exemptions to the land disposal 
restrictions under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to the 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act have been granted to Solutia, 
Inc, Chocolate Bayou Facility (Solutia) for two Class I injection wells 
located at Alvin, Texas. As required by 40 CFR Part 148, the company 
has adequately demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Environmental 
Protection Agency by the petitions and supporting documentation that, 
to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no migration of 
hazardous constituents from the injection zone for as long as the waste 
remains hazardous. These final decisions allow the underground 
injection by Solutia, of the specific restricted hazardous wastes 
identified in these exemptions, into Class I hazardous waste injection 
wells Nos. WDW-224 and WDW-326 at the Chocolate Bayou, Alvin, Texas 
facility, until December 31, 2026, unless EPA moves to terminate these 
exemptions under provisions of 40 CFR 148.24. Additional conditions 
included in these final decisions may be reviewed by contacting the 
Region 6 Ground Water/UIC Section. As required by 40 CFR 148.22(b) and 
124.10, a public notice was issued June 5, 2008. The public comment 
period closed on July 21, 2008. No comments were received. These 
decisions constitute final Agency action and there is no Administrative 
appeal. These decisions may be reviewed/appealed in compliance with the 
Administrative Procedure Act.

DATES: These actions are effective as of July 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petitions and all pertinent information 
relating thereto are on file at the following location: Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 6, Water Quality Protection Division, Source 
Water Protection Branch (6WQ-S), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Dellinger, Chief Ground Water/
UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone (214) 665-7150.

    Dated: July 28, 2008.
Miguel I. Flores,
Division Director, Water Quality Protection Division.
[FR Doc. E8-17815 Filed 8-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LEILA ANN ANTONNICOLA

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-11425

HON. BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN

vs.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

______________________________/

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon’s Report and

Recommendation dated May 6, 2010. No objections were filed thereto.

This Court had an opportunity to fully review this matter and believes that the Magistrate

Judge has reached the correct conclusions for the proper reasons.

ACCORDINGLY:

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s Report and

Recommendation dated May 6, 2010, is hereby accepted and adopted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is

GRANTED, and that the findings of the Commissioner are AFFIRMED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.

Dated: May 24, 2010 S/Bernard A. Friedman______________

Detroit, Michigan BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
H. R. 3877

One Hundred Fourth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

An Act

To designate the United States Post Office building located at 351 West Washington

Street in Camden, Arkansas, as the ‘‘David H. Pryor Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DAVID H. PRYOR POST OFFICE BUILDING.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The United States Post Office building

located at 351 West Washington Street in Camden, Arkansas, shall

be known and designated as the ‘‘David H. Pryor Post Office

Building’’.

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation,

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the building

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference

to the ‘‘David H. Pryor Post Office Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### ORANGE VENTURES, INC., d/b/a Pure Gold/Diamonds, Appellant, v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD and Administrative Law Judge, Appellees. and ORANGE VENTURES, INC., d/b/a Pure Gold/Diamonds, Appellant, v. Walter W. TURNER, Commissioner of Department of Workers’ Claims, Appellee.

Nos. 95-CA-3114-WC, 95-CA-3357-MR.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 3, 1996.

Petition for Review of a Decision of the Department of Workers’ Claims, No. WC-95-027.

Philip E. Wilson, Earl S. Wilson, Jr., Wilson, DeCamp & Talbott, P.S.C., Lexington, for Appellant.

*910Andrew F. Manno, Dept, of Workers’ Claims, Frankfort, for Appellees.

Before LESTER, C.J., and HOWERTON and KNOPF, JJ.

HOWERTON, Judge.

The two above-styled cases seek review of a decision of the Commissioner, Department of Workers’ Claims, which dismissed appellant’s appeal from an opinion and order of the Honorable Donna H. Terry, Chief Administrative Law Judge, dismissing appellant’s contest of a civil penalty assessed pursuant to KRS 342.990(8). By order entered February 21,1996, this Court required appellant to show cause why these two actions should not be dismissed as being outside the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals. Having considered appellant’s response thereto, the Court has determined that appellant has not shown cause and it is ORDERED that cases number 95-CA-3114-WC and number 95-CA-3357-MR be DISMISSED.

Case number 95-CA-3114-WC is a petition for review filed under CR 76.25. However, that Rule explicitly relates to the direct review by the Court of Appeals of decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board. Section (2) of the Rule makes a specific reference to KRS 342.285 which provides for Board review of the administrative law judge’s awards or orders. Clearly, CR 76.25 has no application to the review of a decision of the Department of Workers’ Claims.

Case number 95-CA-3357-MR is an appeal filed pursuant to KRS 342.990(7).

However, Kentucky Constitution Sec. 111(2) allows only the Supreme Court to authorize the direct review of decisions of administrative agencies of the Commonwealth by the Court of Appeals. Pursuant to SCR 1.030(3) and CR 76.25(1), the Supreme Court has authorized appeals to the Court of Appeals only from final decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board. Therefore, we conclude that KRS 342.990(7) which provides for appeals to the Court of Appeals from final decisions of the Department of Workers’ Claims conflicts with Kentucky Constitution Sec. 111(2). We are of the opinion that review of those decisions must be initiated by original action in a circuit court. Ky. Const., Sec. 14; KRS 23A.010(1). *See Kendall v. Beiling,*295 Ky. 782, 175 S.W.2d 489 (1943), and similar cases.

The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is DIRECTED to REFUND the sum of $125 to appellant, which represents one of the two filing fees paid to this Court by appellant.

All concur.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 44310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17460]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Application of Priester Aviation, LLC for Certificate Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2008-7-0067); Dockets DOT-
OST-2008-0066 and DOT-OST-2008-0067.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested 
persons to show cause why it should not issue an order finding Priester 
Aviation, LLC, fit, willing, and able, and awarding it certificates of 
public convenience and necessity to engage in interstate and foreign 
charter air transportation of persons, property and mail.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than 
August 8, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in 
Dockets DOT-OST-2008-0066 and DOT-OST-2008-0067 and addressed to U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, (M-30, Room W12-140), 
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 
20590, and should be served upon the parties listed in Attachment A to 
the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damon D. Walker, Air Carrier Fitness 
Division (X-56, Room W86-465), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-7785.

    Dated: July 23, 2008.
Michael W. Reynolds,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. E8-17460 Filed 7-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GHAZI MANNI et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 09-20193

Honorable Julian Abele Cook, Jr.

ORDER

Ghazi Manni, who is one of three persons identified as Defendants in this criminal action,

is charged with (1) one count of conspiring to commit wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1349; (2) one count

of conspiring to influence sporting contests by bribery, 18 U.S.C. § 224(a), and (2) seventeen

counts of an unlawful use of a facility in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 1952. 

Currently before the Court is Manni’s motion for the appointment of a secondary counsel

whom he seeks to assist his retained counsel in the defense pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act,

18 U.S.C. § 3006A.

In support of his request, Manni submits that a tremendous amount of time, effort, and

technical assistance will be required to adequately prepare for and to conduct the trial in this case.

He notes that (1) the thirty-three page indictment includes nineteen counts against him, and (2) in

the course of the Government’s three-year investigation of this case, hundreds of telephone calls

were intercepted pursuant to a Title III wiretap. He also states that discovery in this case exceeds

a thousand pages of documents. Although Manni has retained his current counsel, he states - and

2:09-cr-20193-MAG-RSW Doc # 61 Filed 08/20/12 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 183
2

has submitted a financial affidavit to demonstrate - that he lacks the financial means with which

to pay for a second attorney whose services will be needed.

The Court concludes that, pursuant to 7A Guide to Judiciary Policy: Defender Services §

230.53.20, the appointment of a secondary counsel (1) is necessary under the circumstances of this

case, and (2) would be in the interest of justice in this difficult case. Accordingly, the Court

appoints Kimberly W. Stout as the secondary counsel to assist in Manni’s defense.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 S/Julian Abele Cook 

JULIAN ABELE COOK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: August 20, 2012

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro

se parties on this date, August 20, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner for KaMyra Doaks 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5100

2:09-cr-20193-MAG-RSW Doc # 61 Filed 08/20/12 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 184
COL_Exhibit_10.n.2_3.31.2014






Exhibit 10-n-2


Schedule of Executives of the Company who are a party to the Change of Control Agreement:


Three-Year Agreement


		
	1.
	Barry M. Abzug


		
	2.
	Patrick E. Allen


		
	3.
	John-Paul E. Besong 


		
	4.
	Bruce M. King


		
	5.
	Nan Mattai


		
	6.
	Robert K. Ortberg


		
	7.
	Kent L. Statler


		
	8.
	Robert A. Sturgell






Two-Year Agreement


		
	1.
	Tatum J. Buse


		
	2.
	Philip J. Jasper


		
	3.
	Colin R. Mahoney


		
	4.
	Martha L. May


		
	5.
	Robert J. Perna


		
	6.
	Jeffrey A. Standerski


		
	7.
	Douglas E. Stenske
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF DAN RIVER, INC.  AS OF JANUARY 1, 2000 AND THE
RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 1, 2000 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-01-2000
<CASH>                                           2,084
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   77,009
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    168,487
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               265,093
<PP&E>                                         476,438
<DEPRECIATION>                                 179,705
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 684,582
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           90,728
<BONDS>                                        292,416
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           227
<OTHER-SE>                                     270,725
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   684,582
<SALES>                                        628,899
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               628,899
<CGS>                                          512,977
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  512,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (2,267)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,970
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,255
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,715
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,715
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.63


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-40677

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LUIS MAURICIO CRUZ-RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:10-CR-687-1

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Luis Mauricio CruzRamirez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Cruz-Ramirez has not filed a response. We have

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein.

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 21, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-40677 Document: 00511515577 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2011
No. 10-40677

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 10-40677 Document: 00511515577 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2011
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CLIFTON E JACKSON and 

CHRISTOPHER M SCHARNITZKE,

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-11529

Honorable David M. Lawson

v. 

SEGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT 

SERVICES, INC., COCA COLA 

ENTERPRISES, INC., and PAUL 

DROUILLARD,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION

The matter comes before the Court on defendant Paul Drouillard’s application to file a brief

in support of his motion to dismiss that exceeds the page limitations of the local rules. The

defendant asks for permission to file a thirty-five page brief. The Court has reviewed the matter and

will grant the request.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the application to exceed page limitation [dkt. #14] is

GRANTED. The defendant may file a brief in support of his motion to dismiss that does not exceed

thirty-five pages.

s/David M. Lawson 

DAVID M. LAWSON

United States District Judge

Dated: June 17, 2009

2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 16 Filed 06/17/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 247
-2-

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on June 17, 2009.

s/Diane Opalewski 

DIANE OPALEWSKI

2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 16 Filed 06/17/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 248
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 134274 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134274 COA: 275872 Lake CC: 02-003912-FC TONY KERR, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the June 12, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

K ELLY , J., would grant leave to appeal.

t1022 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 29, 2007

Clerk