alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.12 
  
 Central Garden & Pet Company 
 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Agreement 
  
 As of June 19, 2002, Executive shall have a deferred compensation bookkeeping account, which shall be maintained as a liability of the Company.
Executive may elect to defer his salary and bonus at such times and in such amounts as determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors in its sole discretion, and until an election is made, the lesser of all or $150,000 of any
future bonus payable to Executive shall be deferred hereunder Deferrals hereunder shall be subject to appropriate tax withholding requirements and shall be credited to the deferred compensation account. This arrangement is unfunded and Executive is
a general unsecured creditor of Employer with respect to the amounts credited hereunder. Executive may not alienate, assign or encumber his interest hereunder. 
  

The Compensation Committee shall select a measuring investment fund or funds for crediting investment gains or losses to Executive’s deferred
compensation account and, if applicable, Executive may make investment measuring fund elections in accordance with such rules as may be established by the Committee in its sole discretion. The initial measuring investment fund rate of return shall
be equal to the rate of return available under the ING Fixed Account-Enhansed available in the Company 401(k) plan or its replacement. The Company is under no obligation to make actual investments. The Company shall pay all costs and expenses of
establishing and maintaining the deferral account. 
  
 Executive
may elect how and when his deferred compensation account will be paid to him in accordance with rules established by the Compensation Committee in its sole discretion. If no rules are established, the balance of Executive’s deferred
compensation account will be paid to him as soon as practicable following termination of his employment from the Company in a cash lump sum, subject to applicable tax withholding requirements. Executive may also make lump sum withdrawals from the
deferred compensation account based on his financial hardship or for any other reason, subject to the Committee’s consent, or, for any reason, and without Committee’s consent subject to a 10% penalty, unless Employer is about to undergo a
“change of control,” as defined in Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in which case no penalty will be imposed. 
  
 This Agreement constitutes the sole and exclusive agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof and may be amended only by the mutual
agreement of the parties. The Compensation Committee shall have sole and full discretion with respect to the administration of this Agreement. 
  

							
		
	 EXECUTIVE:
	    	 COMPANY:

				
	 By:
	 	   /s/    Glenn Novotny

	    	 By:
	  	   /s/    William E. Brown


	 	 	           Glenn Novotny
	    	 Its:
	  	           Chairman
#### Job Cranson v. John T. Smith.

[See ante, p. 189.]

*Transfers by debtors before judgment,*

Where a judgment creditor has elected to treat as fraudulent a' conveyance made by his debtor before the judgment, and notwithstanding the transfer of title has proceeded to sell the property on an execution, he cannot afterward maintain a bill in equity to set aside the conveyance.

Motion for rehearing.

Submitted Jan. 4.

Denied Jan. 5.

*S. 3. Ha/rmon*for the motion.

Per Curiam.

The motion for a rehearing in this case must be denied. The party elected his remedy when, instead of filing his bill to set aside the alleged fraudulent conveyance before proceeding to a sale, he decided to treat that conveyance as void and sell at once. That there are serious objections to that course was made evident in what was said in *Messmore v. Huggard*46 Mich. 558. If the judgment creditor is entitled, of strict legal right, to proceed to the sale when the title of record is not in the judgment debtor, and when competition at the sale will be precluded by that fact,- it is no more than justice to leave him to rely upon the strict legal right, and to refuse equitable assistance in perfecting a sale that ought not to have been made under the circumstances.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

QUAWI SMITH,

Petitioner

v.

THE PROTHONOTARY OF THE PA

SUPREME COURT,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 82 EM 2022

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 20 th day of October , 2022, the Application for Leave to File Original

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and the Application for an

Immediate Hearing are DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<LEGEND>                       THIS   SCHEDULE    CONTAINS   SUMMARY   FINANCIAL
                               INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE   CONSOLIDATED
                               BALANCE  SHEET  AT  SEPTEMBER  30,  1995  AND THE
                               RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND
                               OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
                               30, 1995 OF STRATFORD  AMERICAN  CORPORATION  AND
                               ITS SUBSIDIARIES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
                               BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                              1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                            1,169,000
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       260,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    839,000
<PP&E>                                              615,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       82,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3,196,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1,847,000
<BONDS>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                            841,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (1,185,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3,196,000
<SALES>                                             680,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9,536,000
<CGS>                                               498,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     9,159,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  164,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (344,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (344,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   3,402,000
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3,058,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .04
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patrice Behanzin WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-7525.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 27, 2001.

Decided May 23, 2001.

Patrice Behanzin Wilson, pro se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Patrice Behanzin Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to waive or defer his criminal fine and construing his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion attacking his criminal conviction as a motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000) and denying the same. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error in either the district court’s construal of the Rule 60(b) motion as a § 2255 motion or its subsequent denial of that motion. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss as to that claim on the reasoning of the district court. *United States v. Wilson,*Nos. CR-96-34-5-BR; CA-00-229-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Sept. 13, 2000).

Addressing Wilson’s motion to waive or defer his criminal fine, we note that Wilson failed to raise this claim on direct appeal and has not demonstrated cause and prejudice for this failure. Accordingly, we find the claim waived. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
[ARTICLE] 5
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   6-MOS
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          DEC-31-1998
[PERIOD-END]                               JUN-30-1998
[CASH]                                          98,806
[SECURITIES]                                         0
[RECEIVABLES]                                   77,505
[ALLOWANCES]                                         0
[INVENTORY]                                          0
[CURRENT-ASSETS]                                     0
[PP&E]                                               0
[DEPRECIATION]                                       0
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                                 800,408
[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                                0
[BONDS]                                              0
[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                0
[PREFERRED]                                          0
[COMMON]                                             0
[OTHER-SE]                                           0
[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                   800,408
[SALES]                                              0
[TOTAL-REVENUES]                                 3,210
[CGS]                                                0
[TOTAL-COSTS]                                  102,017
[OTHER-EXPENSES]                             (135,866)
[LOSS-PROVISION]                                     0
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                   0
[INCOME-PRETAX]                                 37,059
[INCOME-TAX]                                         0
[INCOME-CONTINUING]                                  0
[DISCONTINUED]                                       0
[EXTRAORDINARY]                                      0
[CHANGES]                                            0
[NET-INCOME]                                    37,059
[EPS-PRIMARY]                                     1.38
[EPS-DILUTED]                                     1.38
</TABLE>
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 25, 2010

d0517 

# Order

May 25, 2010

140869 & (16)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140869 COA: 295996 Ionia CC: 08-013973-FH DARRYL L. GILLIAM-FRENCH, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the February 26, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that th e questions presented
should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit 15**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-132105 and 333-155420 on Form F-3 of our reports dated August 31, 2009, relatingto the consolidated financial statements of Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. (“MUFG”) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs relating to (i) the restatements discussed in Notes 6, 11, 15and 25 to the consolidated financial statements, and (ii) the changes in methods of accounting for (a) defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans, (b) stock-based compensation, (c) uncertainty in income taxes and(d) leveraged leases, (e) fair value measurements, (f) fair value option for financial assets and financial liabilities and (g) netting of cash collateral against derivative exposures, as described in Note 1 to the consolidatedfinancial statements), and the effectiveness of MUFG’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of MUFG for the year ended March 31, 2009. 

 

/s/ Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu LLC 

**DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU LLC**

 

Tokyo, Japan 

August 31, 2009
MBGC Conclusion 

• Concluded December 2009 

– Workshop 4 December 2009 

• Challenge Problems arising from MBGC 

– Non-frontal still and video 

– Good, Bad, & Ugly still face 

• Proposed Challenge Problems in 

development 

– Performance prediction 

1 
Non-frontal Video 

Walking 

Vs. 

Activity 

Activity 

Vs. 

Activity 
Algorithm vs. Human Performance 

Algorithm Performance Human Performance 
Face Pairs 

Good Face Pairs Challenging Face Pairs 
Good, Bad, Ugly Performance 
2 

0 

1 

0 

Multiple Biometric 

E V A L U A T I O N 

• The Still Face Track 

– Three million faces 

– Open till 26 May 

• Portal Track 

– Based on portal challenge problem 

• Begins on April 12th 2010 

• Video Track 

– Based on video challenge problem 

• Begins on March 31st 2010 6
EX-10.1






Exhibit 10.1




Rochester Medical Corporation

Fiscal 2006 Executive Compensation Plan




(adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors on November 16, 2005)




MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE PLAN (BONUS)



Eligibility




	 	•	 	All Executive Officers and Director level management personnel will be eligible to participate.






	 	•	 	Recommended participation rates have been set by the President, and are based upon the respective position level
and function of each executive. In all cases, participation rates are well within competitive incentive
compensation ranges.





Fiscal 2006



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Bonus Participation	 	Weighted Performance Criteria
	 	 	(% of Base Salary)	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Target	 	Maximum	 	 	 	 
	Participant	 	Minimum Payout	 	Payout	 	Payout	 	Sales	 	Operating Income
	Conway, Jim	 	0%	 	35%	 	52.5%	 	50%	 	50%
	Conway, Philip
	 	 	0	%	 	 	25	%	 	 	37.5	%	 	 	*	 	 	 	*	 
	Horner, Dara Lynn
	 	 	0	%	 	 	25	%	 	 	37.5	%	 	 	75	%	 	 	25	%
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Jonas, David
	 	 	0	%	 	 	25	%	 	 	37.5	%	 	 	50	%	 	 	50	%
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Sholtis, Martyn
	 	 	0	%	 	 	25	%	 	 	37.5	%	 	 	85	%	 	 	15	%
	Anglin, Robert
	 	 	0	%	 	 	20	%	 	 	30	%	 	 	50	%	 	 	50	%






     


* Rather than sales and operating income, performance criteria based on measurable production goals
related to productivity, scrap reduction and intermittent cost reduction.




	 	•	 	The sales and operating income performance targets shall be set and approved annually by
the Compensation Committee.





Bonus Calculation and Payout



The President will evaluate actual results from the respective areas of responsibility for each
executive against financial targets. This evaluation will result in a recommended payout level as
a percentage of the annual incentive target. Performance levels and recommended payouts will be
reviewed and approved by the Compensation Committee prior to disbursement.
No. 07-13-00408-CR

Michelle Lorraine Lehman From the County Court at Law No. 2

 Appellant of Ellis County

v. September 8, 2014

The State of Texas Opinion by Justice Pirtle

 Appellee

§

§

§

§

§

§

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated September 8, 2014, it is ordered,

adjudged and decreed that the judgments of the trial court be modified to delete the

order to pay $600 for attorney’s fees and as modified, the judgments are affirmed.

Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis, no costs beyond those that

have already been paid are adjudged.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o

FILE COPY
Exhibit 32


                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I, Thomas Glover, Chief Executive Officer of Vasomedical,  Inc. (the "Company"),
certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

          (1)  the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company for the three
               months ended November 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with
               the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
               Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated:  January 16, 2007
                                  /s/ Thomas Glover
                                  -------------------------------------
                                  Thomas Glover
                                  Chief Executive Officer




I,  Tricia  Efstathiou,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of  Vasomedical,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

          (1)  the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company for the three
               months ended November 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with
               the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
               Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated:  January 16, 2007
                                  /s/ Tricia Efstathiou
                                  -------------------------------------
                                  Tricia Efstathiou
                                  Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 12.2**CERTIFICATION**I, Kazuya Imai, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Mitsui & Co., Ltd.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;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 ofoperations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the company 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 information relatingto the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:September 26, 2005        By  /s/ Kazuya Imai   Name:  Kazuya Imai   Title:  Senior Executive Managing Officerand
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32


                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I,  Photios T.  Paulson,  Chief  Executive  Officer of  Vasomedical,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
          ended  February  29,  2004  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
     (2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Dated: April 14, 2004

                                       /s/ Photios T. Paulson
                                       Photios T. Paulson
                                       Chief Executive Officer




I, Thomas W. Fry, Chief Financial Officer of Vasomedical,  Inc. (the "Company"),
certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
          ended  February  29,  2004  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
     (2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Dated: April 14, 2004

                                         /s/ Thomas W. Fry
                                         Thomas W. Fry
                                         Chief Financial Officer