alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.1


 





Amendment No. 1
to


Amended and Restated

Employment Agreement


 


This Amendment No. 1 (the
 "Amendment"), to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated April 3, 2019, by and among Sterling Bancorp,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), Sterling National Bank, a national banking association organized and existing
under the laws of the United States of America (the "Bank" and, together with the Company, "Sterling"),
and Jack L. Kopnisky ("Executive") (the "Agreement") is made and entered into as of December
15, 2021, to be effective on January 1, 2022 (the "Effective Date").


 


WHEREAS, the Company,
the Bank and Executive desire to amend the Agreement to extend the term of the Executive's employment with the Company and the Bank on
the Effective Date for a period of one year.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and obligations hereinafter set forth, the Company, the Bank and Executive hereby
agree as follows:


 


1.       
Section 2(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:


 


2.       Employment
Period.


 


(a)       Duration.
Executive's period of employment with Sterling under this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall continue until December
31, 2022 (or, if a Change in Control (as defined below) occurs prior to such anniversary, the second anniversary of the date of the Change
in Control, if later), unless terminated prior thereto by either Sterling or Executive in accordance with Section 6 hereof (such
period of employment being the "Employment Period").


 


2.       Except
as expressly stated herein, this Amendment does not amend or otherwise modify any of the terms or conditions of the Agreement, which shall
remain in full force and effect pursuant to its terms. Any terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement.
To the extent applicable, each Party hereby represents and warrants that its respective signatory has been and is on the date of this
Amendment duly authorized by all necessary corporate action to execute this Amendment.


 


3.       This
Amendment may be executed in a number of identical counterparts, which, taken together, shall constitute collectively one and the same
agreement.





 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the Company and the Bank have caused this Agreement to be executed and Executive has hereunto set his hand, all as of the Effective Date
specified above.


  





	 	STERLING BANCORP
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Richard O’Toole
	 		Name: Richard O’Toole
	 		Title: Chairman of the Board of Directors



 


	 	STERLING NATIONAL BANK
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Richard O’Toole
	 		Name: Richard O’Toole
	 		Title: Chairman of the Board of Directors



 


	 	EXECUTIVE
	 	 
	 	/s/ Jack L. Kopnisky
	 	Jack L. Kopnisky
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 62629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25486]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 5 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and 
Texas)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 5 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, November 9, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Robb at 1-888-912-1227 or 
414-231-2360.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Area 5 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Tuesday, November 9, 2010, at 11 a.m. Central Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Patricia Robb. 
For more information please contact Ms. Robb at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-
231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin Avenue, 
Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: October 4, 2010.
Shawn F. Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-25486 Filed 10-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 32.1

 

Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as AdoptedPursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with the annual Report of Bemax Inc., (the“Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Taiwo Aimasiko, Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(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: July 2, 2017

/s/ Taiwo Aimasiko

____________________________

Taiwo Aimasiko

Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 12.1​



CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER UNDER SECTION 302 OF 
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Isaac Israel, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment Number 1 to annual report on Form 20-F of Kitov Pharma Ltd.;                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



|Date: March 31, 2020    | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|/s/ Isaac Israel        | 
|Isaac Israel            | 
|Chief Executive Officer |
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1714 

To clarify the boundaries of Coastal Barrier Resources System Clam Pass 

Unit FL–64P. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 27, 2007 

Mr. MACK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To clarify the boundaries of Coastal Barrier Resources 

System Clam Pass Unit FL–64P. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF CERTAIN COASTAL BAR4 RIER RESOURCES SYSTEM MAPS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The map subtitled ‘‘FL–64P’’, re6 lating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System unit des7 ignated as Coastal Barrier Resources System Clam Pass 

8 Unit FL–64P, that is included in the set of maps entitled 

9 ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources System’’ and referred to in 

10 section 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HR 1714 IH

1 U.S.C. 3503(a)), is hereby replaced by another map relat2 ing to that unit entitled ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources Sys3 tem Clam Pass Unit, FL–64P’’ and dated July 21, 2005 

4 (b) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior 

5 shall keep the map referred to in subsection (a) on file 

6 and available for inspection in accordance with section 

7 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 

8 3503(b)). 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 18-3501

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Garland Lightfoot

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

 ____________

 Submitted: July 25, 2019

Filed: July 30, 2019

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Garland Lightfoot directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense and the

district court imposed a within-Guidelines sentence. His counsel has moved for

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern 1

District of Iowa.
leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), suggesting that the district court abused its discretion in denying a downward

variance. Lightfoot has filed a pro se brief, claiming that he received ineffective

assistance of counsel.

We first conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying

a downward variance, as the court considered Lightfoot’s arguments and reasonably

concluded that a variance was not warranted. See United States v. Lewis, 593 F.3d

765, 772-73 (8th Cir. 2010) (denial of downward variance was substantively

reasonable where district court considered defendant’s arguments and reasonably

exercised its discretion). Next, we decline to address Lightfoot’s pro se ineffectiveassistance claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Hernandez, 281 F.3d 746, 749

(8th Cir. 2002) (ineffective-assistance claim is generally not cognizable on direct

appeal; instead, such claim is properly raised in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 action). Finally,

we have independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________

-2-
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I, Denis J. Salamone, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Hudson City Bancorp,
Inc.;  2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;  3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of and for, the periods presented in this
report;  4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-l5(e)) for the registrant
and have:  a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    (paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986);c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this quarterly report any change, in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. Date: August 6, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Denis J. SalamoneDenis J. SalamoneSenior Executive Vice Presidentand Chief Operating Officer
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Blyth, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending April 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert H. Barghaus, Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)            The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,except for the matters set forth in Part II — Item 5 of this Quarterly Report;and

(2)            The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.
|        |   | /s/ Robert H. Barghaus                     |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Robert H. Barghaus                         |   |
|   |   | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|   |   | June 11, 2007                              |   |
|        |        |                                            |        |  |

 

This certification is made solely for thepurpose of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, subject to the knowledge standard containedtherein, and not for any other purpose.

 

----
# Electronic Training Plan Advisor

More in This Section		

Close

          -  Training Plan Advisor & Online Plan Submission 
          -  MSHA Program Policy Manual 
          -  Part 46 Training Plan Starter Kit 
          -  Part 46 Training Plan Guide 

Provides guidance in developing federally required training plans for Part 46 and Part 48 mines.

Mon, 06/30/2025 - 09:30

Questions regarding this form should be directed to MSHA at (877) 778-6055 or desk.help@dol.gov

Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated to average 60-90 minutes per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and submitting the collection. This collection of information is mandatory, and this is an optional submission method.  You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.  Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing the burden to: USDOL-Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA  22202-5452, Paperwork Reduction Project (1219-0131).  **NOTE: Do not send your completed form to this address.**

Electronic Training Plan Advisor
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7231

JOHN LEWIS WRAY, JR.,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

R. DAVID MITCHELL; BEVERLY PERDUE; ROY COOPER; FORREST 

DONALD BRIDGES; RICHARD L. SHAFFER; SARAH E. KIRBY-TURNER; 

COLLIN MCWHIRTER; DAVID SCHWEEPEE, II; JOHN CHURCH; PAUL 

DITZ; RICHARD G. YOUT; RENITA W. MELTON; SERGEANT DAVIS,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:10-cv-00298-RJC)

Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 16, 2012

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Lewis Wray, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

John Lewis Wray, Jr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order construing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint 

as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and dismissing it. We 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice 

of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of 

the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends 

the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket 

on February 28, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on 

July 13, 2012.* Because Wray failed to file a timely notice of 

appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal 

period, we dismiss the appeal and deny Wray’s motion to add 

documents and petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).
3

adequately presented in the materials before the court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 31****RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION**I, Henry R. Mandell certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Spatializer Audio Laboratories, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:May 13, 2006 /s/ Henry R. Mandell Henry R. MandellChairman of the Board(performing the functions of principal executive officer and principal financial officer)