alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 16-1026V 

Filed: January 26, 2017 

UNPUBLISHED 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

JOHN R. BELT, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

v. * Influenza (“Flu”); Shoulder Injury 

 * Related to Vaccine Administration 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Bruce Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., for petitioner. 

Claudia Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On August 18, 2016, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine 

administration (“SIRVA”) following an October 30, 2015 influenza (“flu”) vaccination in 

his left shoulder. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit 

of the Office of Special Masters. 

On January 26, 2017, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she 

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 

4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent determined the alleged injury is consistent 

with a SIRVA. Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner has satisfied all legal 

prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id.

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 
2

 In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.41


FOURTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This Fourth Amendment (“Amendment”) to the March 18, 2013 Employment Agreement (“Employment Agreement”) by and among Stephen Spengler (the “Executive”), Intelsat S.A. and Intelsat Management LLC is entered into by the undersigned parties.


WHEREAS, effective on or about December 24, 2018, Intelsat Management LLC will merge with and into Intelsat US LLC with Intelsat US LLC being the surviving company (the “Merger”); and


WHEREAS, following the Merger, the Executive’s employment will be transferred from Intelsat Management LLC to Intelsat US LLC.


NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:


1.Effective as of the consummation of the Merger, the Executive’s employment is transferred from Intelsat Management LLC to Intelsat US LLC, and the rights and obligations of Intelsat Management LLC under the Employment Agreement are hereby assigned to Intelsat US LLC.  All references in the Employment Agreement to the Company shall be deemed to refer to Intelsat US LLC.  The effectiveness of this Section is subject to the consummation of the Merger.


2.Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement is amended by adding the following sentence to the end of such Section:


“From and after October 22, 2015, the Executive shall serve as a member of the Board of Directors of Parent for as long as he is reappointed as Director by Parent’s shareholders.”


3.As amended and modified by this Amendment, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. For the sake of clarity, Executive agrees that the modifications provided in this Amendment shall not give Executive grounds to terminate his employment or the Employment Agreement for Good Reason (as defined in the Employment Agreement).  


4.If there is any conflict between the terms of the Employment Agreement and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall prevail. 
 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of December 24, 2018.




INTELSAT S.A.




By:     /s/ Michelle V. Bryan
Name: Michelle V. Bryan
Title: Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Administrative Officer & Secretary






INTELSAT MANAGEMENT LLC




By:     /s/ Michelle V. Bryan
Name: Michelle V. Bryan
Title: Deputy Chairman and Secretary

















INTELSAT US LLC




By:     /s/ Michelle V. Bryan
Name: Michelle V. Bryan
Title: Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Administrative Officer & Secretary






THE EXECUTIVE


/s/ Stephen Spengler
Stephen Spengler
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6200 

To reauthorize the Freedom’s Way National Heritage Area, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2021 

Mrs. TRAHAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Freedom’s Way National Heritage Area, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Freedom’s Way Na5 tional Heritage Area Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF FREEDOM’S WAY NATIONAL 

7 HERITAGE AREA. 

8 (a) REMOVAL OF TOTAL FUNDING LIMIT.—Section 

9 8006(i) of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 

10 2009 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 111–11; 123 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6200 IH

1 Stat. 1260) is amended by striking paragraph (1) and in2 serting the following: 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be 

4 appropriated to carry out this section not more than 

5 $1,000,000 for each fiscal year.’’. 

6 (b) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 8006(j) of the Om7 nibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (54 U.S.C. 

8 320101 note; Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 1260) is 

9 amended by striking ‘‘the date that is 15 years after the 

10 date of enactment of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘September 

11 30, 2036’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS

      I, Jing Hao, Chief Financial Officer of Orient Paper Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) the Transition Report on Form 10-K for the transition period of Orient
Paper Inc. (the "Registrant") from March 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007
resulting from the change of the Company's fiscal year end from February 28 to
December 31 (the "Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and

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


Date: March 31, 2008                          /s/ Jing Hao
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Name:  Jing Hao
                                              Title: Chief Financial Officer

A signed original 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.
Exhibit 4.66


 


Buyer: CSUN Eurasia Energy Systems Industry and Trade
Inc.


 


Address :Istanbul Industrial & Free Trade Zone Akif
Kopuz St. No: T-10, B Block, 1st floor, Aydinli-Tuzla 34957 ISTANBULnlı-Tuzla 34957 İSTANBUL Turkey


 





 


Purchase Order


 


	PO No.:	Date:


 


Supplier :


CEEG (SHANGHAI) SOLAR SCIENCE


TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.


 


Address: NO.5999 GUANGFULIN ROAD, SONGJIANG, SHANGHAI, CHINA


Tel: 86 21 6025 9200


Fax: 86 21 6029 1900


Contact Person : hong.yu@chinasunergy.com


 


Attention:


We are pleased to submit the Purchase Order
for the attached Materials on the terms and conditions set forth below.


 


1 Specifications:


 


	Material Name	 	Material No.	 	Specification	 	Quantity	 	Unit	 	 	Total amount	 
	semi-finished solar module	 	550035	 	265-60P	 	5720	 	 	113.95	 	 	€	651,794.00	 
	semi-finished solar module	 	550035	 	250-60P	 	29120	 	 	102.5	 	 	€	2,984,800.00	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Total amount:	 	 	 	 	 	€	3,636,594.00	 



 


	2 Delivery date:	8/15/2013
	 	 
	3 Terms of Payment:	T/T 30 days after received goods.


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


	4 Shipment Term:	CIF Turkey, BY SEA
	 	 
	5 Specifications:	Csun's specifications as previous.
	 	 
	6 Broken Rate and Shortage:	Except forwarder problem, broken rate should be less than 0.3%, if over, supplier should be replaced them within 30 days.Supplier should replenish the shortage within 30 days after receiving the notice from buyer.
	 	 
	7 remarks:	This PO is made out in two originals, one original to be held by each party in witness thereof. Fax for this PO is same valid as original.


 


	For and on behalf of	 	For and on behalf of
	 	 	 
	CSUN Eurasia Energy Systems Industry and Trade
Inc.	 	CEEG (SHANGHAI) SOLAR SCIENCE
	 	 	TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD
	 	 	 
	/s/ CSUN Eurasia Energy Systems Industry and Trade
Inc.	 	/s/ CEEG (SHANGHAI) SOLAR SCIENCE
	 	 	TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD
	 	 	 
	Date:	 	Date:
Exhibit 32(a)



PEOPLES ENERGY CORPORATION AND CONSOLIDATED AFFILIATES

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 combined Quarterly Report of Peoples Energy Corporation (the "Company"), The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company ("Peoples Gas") and North Shore Gas Company ("North Shore Gas") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas M. Patrick, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas.



|/s/ THOMAS M. PATRICK |  |  | May 10, 2005
|--------------------- |  |  | ------------
|                      |  |  | Date        

Thomas M. Patrick
Chairman of the Board, 
President and Chief Executive Officer of
Peoples Energy Corporation



|/s/ THOMAS M. PATRICK |  |  | May 10, 2005
|--------------------- |  |  | ------------
|                      |  |  | Date        

Thomas M. Patrick
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company



|/s/ THOMAS M. PATRICK |  |  | May 10, 2005
|--------------------- |  |  | ------------
|                      |  |  | Date        

Thomas M. Patrick
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
North Shore Gas Company
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, C.E. Andrews, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filedin respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Private Credit Student LoanTrust 2006-B (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);     2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Actperiodic reports;     4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required under this reportunder Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, theservicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement andadministration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and     5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicingcriteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit tothis report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by The Bank of NewYork, as indenture trustee.Date: March 23, 2007   /s/ C.E. Andrews   C.E. Andrews  Chief Financial Officer  SLM Funding LLC
189 La. 227

#### FROST LUMBER INDUSTRIES, Inc., v. BRYANT et al.

No. 34609.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 7, 1938.

Dan W. Stewart, Jr., of Minden, and Slay & Simon, of Fort Worth, Tex., for appellant Royal Oil & Gas Corporation.

Lee and Lee, of Shreveport, for appel-lee.

O’NIELL, Chief Justice.

The plaintiff sued to cancel an oil and gas lease on the ground of abandonment, as to one of two tracts of land that were included in the lease. The suit was brought against several, parties having assignments of the lease, affecting different parts of the tract on which the lessor is seeking to annul the lease. The court gave judgment for the plaintiff, annulling the lease, on the one tract on which the lessor sought to annul it. Only one of the defendants, namely, the Royal Oil & Gas Corporation, appealed from the decision; and that defendant filed a motion in this court alleging that the corporation had abandoned the appeal, and asking to have the appeal dismissed. Thereupon, the plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was abandoned by the only appellant. The case was submitted on the motion to dismiss, and on its merits, when it was called for hearing according to its regular assignment. None of the defendants except the Royal Oil & Gas Corporation has made an appearance in this court. The attorney representing the Royal Oil & Gas Corporation failed to appear when the case was called for argument, according to its assignment. The submission of the case was made on the motion'of the attorney for the plaintiff, with the understanding that the case should be considered on its merits only in the event that the court should refuse to dismiss the appeal. The attorney for the plaintiff had some doubt as to whether the court was forbidden by article 594 of the Code of Practice to dismiss the appeal without the consent of the defendants who did not appeal, *298and who therefore are considered as ap-pellees. This article of the Code of Practice declares that, when a citation of appeal has been served upon the appellee, the ap-. pellant cannot withdraw his appeal. But that does not mean that, when an appeal has been abandoned by the only one, among several defendants, who has appealed, the plaintiff is not entitled to have the appeal dismissed, merely because the parties who were codefendants have not consented to a dismissal of the appeal. These codefend-ants, who have neither joined in nor answered the appeal, are not concerned with the abandonment of the appeal of the other one of the defendants. The question whether the defendants who have not yet appealed may hereafter appeal will arise only in the event of their undertaking to appeal.

The appeal is dismissed at the cost of the appellant.
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 Annual Report for Rainchief Energy Inc. (the
“Company”) on


Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange


Commission on the date hereof (the “Report), the undersigned,
Paul E. Heney, Chief Executive Officer do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:


 


 


(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) 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.


 


 


By:


 


 


/s/ Paul E. Heney


Paul E. Heney


Chief Executive Officer


May
2, 2014
|   |   |   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

**Washington, D.C. 20549**

**FORM 10-Q**

 

**(Mark One)**

 

x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008

OR

o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from           to

Commission File No. 0-5890

 

|   | **GCI, INC.**                                          |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) |   |

 

|   | **State of Alaska**             |   | **91-1820757**      |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------|---------------------|--------|
|   | (State or other Jurisdiction of |   | (I.R.S Employer     |   |
|   | Incorporation or organization)  |   | Identification No.) |   |

 

|   |                                     | **2550 Denali Street** |       |      |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------|------------------------|------------|-----------|--------|
|   |                                     | **Suite 1000**         |       |      |   |
|   |                                     | **Anchorage, Alaska**  |       | **99503** |   |
|   | (Address of Principal Executive offices) |                   | (Zip Code) |      |
|        |                                          |                        |            |           |        |  |

 

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: **(907) 868-5600**

 

Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report

 

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 o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer.  See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 

| Large accelerated filer o                                             | Accelerated filer o         |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
| Non-accelerated filer x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company o |

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes o No x

 

 

|   | 1 |
|--------|---|

 

----
Exhibit 10.2

 

CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT

 

WHEREAS, Iron Mountain Incorporated (the “Company”) has granted and may hereafter grant the undersigned (the “Optionee”) one or more options (the “Options”) to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 (the “Common Stock”), pursuant to option agreements between the Company and Optionee (each, an “Option Agreement”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Optionee and the Company desire to provide to the Optionee an additional component of “Good Reason” as used in connection with a “Vesting Change in Control” regarding all outstanding Options held by the Optionee as of the date hereof and as hereafter may be granted under Option Agreements between the Company and the Optionee (as amended and as may be amended or entered into in the future, the “Stock Option Agreements”);

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, the Optionee and the Company agree that the existing Option Agreements are hereby amended to, and future Option Agreements will, provide, notwithstanding any other provision in a Stock Option Agreement or the plan(s) with respect to which such Options are granted (collectively, the “Plans”) to the contrary:

 

1.                                      That the definition of the phrase “Good Reason” as used in connection with a “Vesting Change in Control” shall include the following additional component: “a material diminution in the responsibilities or title of the Optionee’s position with Iron Mountain and/or the assignment to Optionee of duties and responsibilities that are generally inconsistent with the Optionee’s position with Iron Mountain immediately prior to the Vesting Change in Control.” For the avoidance of doubt, “Good Reason” will have occurred if the foregoing component or one of the components of “Good Reason” in the Plans shall have occurred.

 

2.                                      Except as otherwise provided herein, all other terms and conditions of each Stock Option Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

 

Capitalized terms not defined herein have the same meaning given to them in the applicable Stock Option Agreement, or if not defined therein, the applicable Plan.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Optionee and the Company have executed this Change in Control Agreement this 8th day of September, 2008.

 

	
IRON MOUNTAIN INCORPORATED
    	
OPTIONEE
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
By:
    	
/s/ Linda Rossetti
    	
 
    	
/s/ Ernest W. Cloutier
    
	
Its:
    	
Linda Rossetti
    	
 
    	
Name:
    	
Ernest W. Cloutier
#### Ernest MEERAPFEL and Heller E. Meerapfel, co-partners doing business as E. Meerapfel & Son, Appellants, v. Jose P. PEREZ, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida, Division A.

Oct. 8, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.