alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit10.21**

 

**MOCON, INC.**

 

**DESCRIPTIONOF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR**

**COMPENSATIONARRANGEMENTS**

 

 

***Retainer andMeeting Fees.***  Each of thenon-employee directors of MOCON, Inc. receives a retainer fee of $600 per monthwithout regard to the number of board of directors or committee meetings heldor attended by such director, along with an additional $400 for each boardmeeting or committee meeting attended in person, and $200 for each boardmeeting or committee meeting attended via telephone. In addition, the Chairmanof the Audit Committee receives a fee of $100 per month.

 

***Stock Options***. Non-employee directors are granted options to purchase shares of MOCONcommon stock from time to time in the sole discretion of the board ofdirectors.

 

***Director Retirement Plan***.  Pursuant to the MOCON, Inc. DirectorRetirement Plan, a non-employee director who has served on the board ofdirectors of MOCON for at least five years will, upon retirement, receive anamount equal to the annual retainer fee such director would have been entitledto receive during the fiscal year in which such director’s retirementoccurs.  This payment, however, will notbe made to a director who, following his or her retirement, continues to serveas a consultant to MOCON or any of its subsidiaries.  Any amount payable under this retirement planwill be paid as determined by the MOCON board of directors in its solediscretion following such director’s retirement.

 

***Reimbursement ofExpenses.***  Non-employeedirectors are reimbursed for actual expenses incurred in attending board andcommittee meetings.

 

----
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4668

To designate the third floor of the Ellis Island Immigration Museum, located 

on Ellis Island in New York Harbor, as the ‘‘Bob Hope Memorial Library’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 23, 2004

Mr. ENGEL (for himself and Mr. GALLEGLY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JULY 8, 2004

Rereferred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To designate the third floor of the Ellis Island Immigration 

Museum, located on Ellis Island in New York Harbor, 

as the ‘‘Bob Hope Memorial Library’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The third floor of the Ellis Island Immigration Mu5 seum, located on Ellis Island in New York Harbor, shall 

6 be known and designated as the ‘‘Bob Hope Memorial Li7 brary’’. 
2

HR 4668 RFH 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the third 

4 floor of the Ellis Island Immigration Museum referred to 

5 in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Bob 

6 Hope Memorial Library’’.

Æ
Version	1.1	/	Date	of	Issue:	2.09.16	/	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic	Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

OSAC	RESEARCH	NEEDS	ASSESSMENT	FORM

Title	of	research	need: CSI minimum crime scene response staffing

Keyword(s): Crime scene staffing, personnel

Submitting	subcommittee(s): Crime Scene Investigation Date	Approved: 11/4/2018

(If	SAC	review	identifies	additional	subcommittees,	add	them	to	the	box	above.)

Background	Information:

1. Description	of	research	need:

To develop guidelines for ensuring the appropriate minimum staff response to a crime scene, empirical data 

is required to understand how the size and complexity of a particular scene impacts processing capability. 

Historically crime scenes are under staffed and the staff working crime scenes are required to work too long 

and do too many tasks without regard to working conditions, stress, and fatigue quality. Too few personnel 

assigned too many tasks at crime scenes can lead to errors and poor quality control. Data required to

develop a minimum staff response plan include scene complexities, human factors (fatigue, stress, safety, 

quality assurance), potential financial impacts, and risk mitigation. 

2. Key	bibliographic	references	relating	to	this	research	need:

No specific research currently available. 

3a. In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	current	laboratory	capabilities?

Research in this area would help to identify the appropriate minimum number of personnel needed to 

adequately work the crime scene and meet public expectations regarding crime scene response. Adequate 

personnel at a scene would provide better quality control of scene work, and less stress, fatigue, and burn 

out of personnel. 

3b. In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	understanding	of	the	scientific	basis	for	the	

subcommittee(s)?
Version	1.1	/	Date	of	Issue:	2.09.16	/	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic	Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

Research would highlight past issues that resulted from inadequate crime scene staffing and provide a basis 

for future minimum crime scene staffing guidelines. 

3c.		In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	services	to	the	criminal	justice	system?

This research would help the criminal justice system through increased efficacy of crime scene processing. 

4.		Status	assessment	(I,	II,	III,	or	IV): I Major gap	in	

current	

knowledge

Minor	gap	in	

current	

knowledge

No	or	limited

current	research	

is	being	

conducted

I III

Existing current	

research	is	being	

conducted

II IV

This	research	need	has	been	identified	by	one	or	more	subcommittees	of	OSAC	and	is	being	provided	as	an	

informational	resource	to	the	community.

Approvals:

Subcommittee Approval	date: 11/7/2018

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	subcommittee.	Once	approved,	forward	to	SAC.)

SAC

1.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	research	need? Yes No

2.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	status	assessment? Yes No

If	no,	what	is	the	status	assessment	of	the	SAC:

Approval	date:

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	SAC.		Once	approved,	forward	to	NIST	for	posting.)
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, James W. Bernau, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Willamette Valley
Vineyards, Incorporated;

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 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 small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the
small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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; and
c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005
/s/ James W. Bernau
    James W. Bernau,
    Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                        EXHIBIT 23.1



                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


   
As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of 
our report included in this Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed 
Registration Statements File Nos. 2-76324, 2-88042, 2-94922, 33-2525, 
33-21102, 33-41465 and 33-65395 on Form S-8 and Nos. 333-01187 and 333-13659
on Form S-3.
    

                                               ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


San Jose, California
October 18, 1996
Unique	Approach	

Specific	Objec4ves	

Problem	Statement	

1. Rapid	prototyping	the	see-through	headmounted	display	and	data	processing	helmet	

2. Landmark	recogni:on	and	tracking	and	tagging	

landmarks	on	the	map	

3. Visual	simultaneous	loca:on	and	mapping	

(SLAM)	and	smart	phone	ad-hoc	network	(SPAN)	

4. Gesture	and	speech	recogni:on	for	naviga:ng	

and	informa:on	retrieval	

5. Superimposing	live	thermal	images	to	the	

helmet		

6. Human-robot	interac:on	interface	development	

for	3D	mapping	of	the	infrastructure	and	the	

First-Person-View	(FPV)	from	drone’s	cameras.	

• Affordable	holographic	smart	helmet		

• Hyper-reality	technology	for	superimposing	ondemand	informa:on	to	objects	in	the	view.	

Yang	Cai	•	Carnegie	Mellon	University	•	ycai@cmu.edu	

Localiza3on	and	mapping	for	first	responders	in	the	airport	(le=)	

and	the superimpose the locations of the Internet of Things (IoT) 

devices under the floor (right)

			 Hyper-Reality	Helmet	for	Mapping	and	Visualizing	Public	Safety	Data		

• Mapping	and	visualizing	the	physical	environment	

of	an	emergent	event	is	a	compelling	need	for	first	

responders.		

• Where	are	the	responder	loca:ons?	Where	are	the	

people	in	need?	Where	are	the	loca:ons	of	assets?	

What	hazards	and	resources	are	present	in	the	

area?	How	to	navigate	inside	the	building?	How	do	

we	update	the	map	on-demand?		

• It	is	challenging	to	work	inside	a	building,	in	a	

tunnel,	or	in	a	cave	where	GPS,	cellular,	and	

infrastructural	WiFi	signals	are	not	available.	

Expected	Impact	

The	thermal	image	is	superimposed	to	the	helmet	

The	prototype	of	the	smart	helmet	(le=)	and	the	projected	

naviga3on	informa3on	about	where	is	the	electrical	room	(right)	

Architecture	of	the	Hyper-Reality	Helmet	System	

The	technology	is	expected	to	assist	first	responders	

in	emergency	environments	of	fire,	flood,	shoo:ng,	

cyber	a_ack,	and	medical	distress,	where	GPS,	

cellular	and	regular	WiFi	signals	are	not	available.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JACK MARTIN VOSE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-10120

D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00734-CKJ 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 9, 2015** 

Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. 

Jack Martin Vose appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. 

FILED

DEC 15 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Vose contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment

782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had

authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v.

Paulk, 569 F.3d 1094, 1095 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). Vose is not entitled to a

sentence reduction because his sentence was not “based on a sentencing range that

has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(2). Rather, his sentence was based on the statutory mandatory minimum

under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vii). The district court properly denied relief.1

 See

Paulk, 569 F.3d at 1095-96. 

Vose’s additional claims do not support relief under section 3582(c)(2). See

Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010) (section 3582(c) does not permit

a “plenary resentencing hearing”). 

AFFIRMED. 

1

 Vose’s contention that he was not subject to the enhanced mandatory

minimum because the judgment does not cite 21 U.S.C. § 851(a) is unavailing. The

mandatory minimum is set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vii).

2 15-10120
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
     August 31, 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: October 16, 2006

                                      /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
     August 31, 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: October 16, 2006

                                       /s/ Tricia Efstathiou
                                       -----------------------
                                       Tricia Efstathiou
                                       Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 24


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


     The undersigned directors of Michigan Financial Corporation, a Michigan
corporation, hereby constitute and appoint Howard L. Cohodas and Kenneth F.
Beck, and each of them, the true and lawful agents and attorneys-in-fact of the
undersigned, with full power and authority in said agents and attorneys-in-fact,
and any one or more of them, to sign for the undersigned and in their respective
names as directors of Michigan Financial Corporation, the Form l0-K Annual
Report to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington,
D.C., pursuant to Section l3 or l5 (d) of the Securities Act of l934 for the
fiscal year ended December 3l, l996.




Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ GARY L. BUTRYN
                                --------------------------------
                                 Gary L. Butryn


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ WILLARD M. CARNE
                                --------------------------------
                                 Willard M. Carne


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ WILLARD L. COHODAS
                                --------------------------------
                                 Willard L. Cohodas


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ CLARENCE R. FISHER
                                --------------------------------
                                 Clarence R. Fisher


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ HUGH C. HIGLEY, JR
                                --------------------------------
                                 Hugh C. Higley, Jr.


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ DAVID HOLLI
                                --------------------------------
                                 David Holli


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ DANIEL H. LORI
                                --------------------------------
                                 Daniel H. Lori


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ FRED M. SAIGH
                                --------------------------------
                                 Fred M. Saigh


Dated  January 20, 1997         /s/ JAMES L. SMITH
                                --------------------------------
                                 James L. Smith
Exhibit 10.16
  MERCK & CO., INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN




---



##### 



PageArticle I
    
    Purpose
    
    1Article II
    
    Definitions
    
    1Article III
    
    Benefits Payable Under This Plan
    
    2Article IV
    
    Payments of Benefits
    
    4Article V
    
    Plan Administration
    
    8Article VI
    
    Claims and Appeal Procedure
    
    8Article VII
    
    Amendment and Termination
    
    9Article VIII
    
    Miscellaneous
    
    10Article IX
    
    Change in Control
    
    11




---



##### 



MERCK & CO., INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN
 I. PURPOSE
  II. DEFINITIONS




---



##### 



III. BENEFITS PAYABLE UNDER THIS PLAN
  2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



IV. PAYMENT OF BENEFITS
    4




---



##### 



provided, however
 provided, however
 provided, however
     5




---



##### 



th
    th
 6




---



##### 



th
           7




---



##### 



V. PLAN ADMINISTRATION
   VI. CLAIMS AND APPEALS PROCEDURE
   
     8




---



##### 



VII. AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION
   9




---



##### 



VIII. MISCELLANEOUS
         10




---



##### 



IX. Change in Control
          11




---



##### 



12




---



#####
11301.

#### GROSSMAN *v.*CITY OF ATLANTA.

Decided April 8, 1920.

The order sustaining the demurrer to the petition and allowing a stated time in which to amend it, to which no exception was taken, fixed the law of the case; and the plaintiff’s amendment having failed to meet the objections raised by the demurrer, the court did not err in dismissing the petition, on oral motion Of the defendant when the case came up for trial.

Action for damages; from Fulton superior court — Judge Ellis. December 1, 1919.

*J. L. Anderson,*for plaintiff.

*J. L. Mayson, J. M. Wood,*for defendant.

Smith, J.

The court overruled the general demurrer to the petition, but sustained all the grounds of the special demurrer, and allowed the plaintiff 20 days within which to amend his petition to meet these special grounds. The order provided that upon failure to meet the grounds of the special demurrer the ease should stand dismissed. To this ruling no exception was taken, nor is error assigned thereon in the bill of exceptions. Therefore the ruling that the petition was subject to the special demurrer_ became the law of the case. The plaintiff, within the 20 days allowed, filed a purported amendment to his petition. This amendment was in all substantial respects merely a reiteration of the various allegations contained in the original petition, and though it did set out somewhat more at length the contentions of the plaintiff, these contentions were substantially the same, and the amendment clearly failed to meet the objections raised by the special grounds of the demurrer. No further amendment was tendered within the 20 days allowed in the court’s order. IJnder these facts, when the case came up for trial before a jury, the court did not err in dismissing it upon oral motion made by the defendant. *Hinson*v. *Mutual Fertilizer Co.,*19 *Ga. App.*121 (91 S. E. 241); *Baker*v. *City of Atlanta,*22 *Ga. App.*483 (96 S. E. 332).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
Exhibit 10.1


 


THE CHUBB CORPORATION


NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR ANNUAL COMPENSATION PROGRAM


 


	
  Cash Compensation

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  • Director
  Stipend

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  50,000

  	
   

  
	
  •
  Supplemental Lead Director Stipend

  	
   

  	
  50,000

  	
   

  
	
  • Annual Committee
  Chair Retainer 

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  - Audit Committee Chairman Stipend

  	
   

  	
  20,000

  	
   

  
	
  - Corporate Governance & Nominating
  Committee Chairman Stipend

  	
   

  	
  12,500

  	
   

  
	
  - Organization & Compensation Committee
  Chairman Stipend

  	
   

  	
  15,000

  	
   

  
	
  - Other

  	
   

  	
  10,000

  	
   

  
	
  • Committee
  Stipend

  	
   

  	
  7,500

  	
   

  
	
  • Fee per
  Board and Committee Meeting

  	
   

  	
  2,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Equity Compensation

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  • Monetized Value of Total Shareholder Return Units
  (TSRs)(1)*

  	
   

  	
  67,500

  	
   

  
	
  • Monetized Value of Stock Units(2)*

  	
   

  	
  22,500

  	
   

  
					



 










(1)                                  TSRs are expressed in units, where one
unit is equivalent to one share.  The
monetized value of TRSs is calculated by reference to Chubb’s closing stock
price on the grant date.  TSRs payout in a range of 0 to 200% of the nominal award depending
upon Chubb’s performance during the applicable performance cycle.


 


(2)                                  Stock Units are expressed in units, where
one unit is equivalent to one share.  The
monetized value of Stock Units is calculated by reference to Chubb’s closing
stock price on the grant date.


 


*                                         Chubb’s Corporate Governance &
Nominating Committee has the authority to raise the aggregate grant of TSRs and
Stock Units up to a monetized value of 1,500 shares of Chubb’s common
stock.  The monetized value of TRSs and
Stock Units is calculated by reference to Chubb’s closing stock price on the
grant date.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4535 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4535

     To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pigment Red 208.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 2004

 Mr. Langevin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pigment Red 208.

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

SECTION 1. PIGMENT RED 208.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.32.27 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2002'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2006''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after January 1, 2003.
                                 <all>
```