alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w27



 






Exhibit 10.27




VOCUS, INC.




COMPENSATION POLICY FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS




     Effective upon the consummation of the proposed initial public offering (the “IPO”) of
Vocus, Inc. (the “Company”), the compensation payable to the non-employee members of the
board of directors of the Company shall be as follows:




	 	•	 	An annual retainer of $12,000.






	 	•	 	$1,000 per board meeting of four hours or more which a director attends in person.
	 
	 	•	 	$500 per board meeting of less than four hours which a director attends in person,
and per board meeting in which a director participates telephonically.
	 
	 	•	 	Similar fees may be paid for attending committee meetings, depending on factors
such as the length and significance of the meetings.
	 
	 	•	 	The chairperson of the audit committee shall receive an additional retainer of
$10,000.
	 
	 	•	 	The chairperson of any other standing committee shall receive an additional
retainer of $3,000.
	 
	 	•	 	Each director shall be reimbursed for customary expenses for attending all board of
directors, committee and stockholder meetings.
	 
	 	•	 	All retainers payable to directors who are affiliated with the Company’s pre-IPO
preferred stockholders shall be paid in stock, and other directors shall have the
option of receiving their retainers in cash or stock.
	 
	 	•	 	Each director shall receive an annual grant of options to purchase shares of the
Company’s common stock, or an equivalent equity award, with an estimated value of
approximately $67,000 on the grant date, based on the Black-Scholes pricing model.
Such grants shall vest at a rate of 33-1/3% each year, and shall have an exercise
price equal to the fair market value on the date of grant.
| 1)   | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:              November 7, 2006 |                                       | /s/ LOWELL              W.              GIFFHORN |
|                                 | Lowell W. Giffhorn Chief Financial Officer |
|                                 |                                            |

----
11376.

#### Lewis *et al. v.*Dickenson.

Smith, J.

1. There is no implied warranty, where there is a sale of personal property under an express warranty. Civil Code (1910), § 4135; *Johnson*v. *Latimer,*71 *Ga.*470; *Malsby*v. *Young,*104 *Ga.*205 (30 S. E. 854) ; *Elgin Jewelry Co.*v. *Estes,*122 *Ga.*809 (50 S. E. 939) ; *Brooks Lumber Co.*v. *Case Threshing Machine Co.,*136 *Ga.*754 (72 S. E. 40).

2. Thus, where in a sale of machinery there is an express warranty that it will do good work, is well made, of good material, and durable when used with proper care, and by the terms of the warranty liability of the seller is predicated upon conditions which must be performed by the purchaser before liability upon the part of the seller is to attach, such as if upon one day’s trial the machine fails to work, then the buyer shall immediately give written notice to the seller, informing him wherein the machine fails, and allow reasonable time for a competent man to be sent to put it in good order and render necessary and friendly assistance to operate it, the seller will not be held liable on the warranty unless the buyer complies with such conditions.

3. The burden being upon the defendant to show that he had complied with the conditions of the warranty, and the evidence failing to show such compliance, the court did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff. *International Harvester Co.*v. *Dillon,*126 *Ga.*672 (55 S. E. 1034).

4. Evidence that the plaintiff came to the defendant’s house and told him to roll the machine under the shod, that the company was making new parts for it, and, if it did not give satisfaction then, that it would take the machine back, did not estop the plaintiff from setting up the • defendant’s waiver of liability by failing to comply with the conditions set out in the warranty. See *Walker*v. *Malsby Co.,*134 *Ga.*399 (1 *a) (67 S.*E. 1039).

5. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to reopen the case after both sides had closed.

6. This suit being one against the maker and accommodation indorser of several promissory notes, and there being a general verdict returned *355in favor of the plaintiff, and judgment entered only as to the maker, and both defendants having made a motion for a new trial, and both of them having brought the case to this court for review, the motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions as to the indorser is denied.

Decided May 12, 1920.

Complaint; from city court of Miller county'—Judge Geer. February 14, 1920.

*N. L. Stapleton,*for plaintiff in error.

*P. D. Rich,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PENNSYLVANIA NATIONAL MUTUAL )

CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-0704-CG-N

)

STRUCTURAL MASONRY, INC., )

THE MOBILE PRESS REGISTER, INC., )

and THE AUSTIN COMPANY, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

Consolidated with

AMERISURE INSURANCE COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff )

)

vs. )

)

STRUCTURAL MASONRY, INC., )

THE MOBILE PRESS REGISTER, INC., )

and THE AUSTIN COMPANY, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

 

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s notice of filing of agreement (Doc. 78),

in which the plaintiff moves the court to lift the stay. Amerisure attached a copy of the

agreement approved by the Bankruptcy Court of the Northern District of Ohio that lifts the

bankruptcy stay and allows The Austin Company, Inc. to participate in this declaratory judgment

action. Upon due consideration, the plaintiff’s motion is hereby GRANTED, and the stay

entered on October 20, 2009, is hereby lifted. This action is referred to the Magistrate Judge for

Case 1:08-cv-00704-CG-N Document 80 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 2
entry of an amended scheduling order.

DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of February, 2010.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00704-CG-N Document 80 Filed 02/10/10 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT
      32.1




**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 Quarterly Report of Magnitude Information Systems, Inc.
      (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the “Form
      10-QSB”), I, Edward Marney, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, as
      of the date hereof, 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
      my **** knowledge,
      that the Company’s Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in the Form 10-QSB, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: November 19, 2007
            
            
            /s/ Edward
              MarneyEdward
              MarneyPresident
              and
              Chief Executive Officer
| (1)   | the      Quarterly Report of Willamette Valley Vineyards, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the      quarterly period ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) 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 Willamette Valley      Vineyards, Inc. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      May 14, 2009                                                               |         |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|
| By:                                                                                   |    | /s/ Jeffrey J. Fox |   |   |
| Name:                Jeffrey J. Fox |         |   |
| Title:                                                                                |         |  Controller |   |

----
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 73087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Office of the Director Notice of Charter Renewal

    In accordance with Title 41 of the U.S. Code of Federal 
Regulations, Section 102-3.65(a), notice is hereby given that the 
Charter for the Board of Regents of the National Library of Medicine 
(BOR) was renewed for an additional two-year period on November 20, 
2014.
    It is determined that the BOR is in the public interest in 
connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Department of 
Health and Human Services by law, and that these duties can best be 
performed through the advice and counsel of this group.
    Inquires may be directed to Jennifer S. Spaeth, Director, Office of 
Federal Advisory Committee Policy, Office of the Director, National 
Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 1000, Bethesda, 
Maryland 20892 (Mail Code 4875), Telephone (301) 496-2123, or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8cfffcede9f8e4e6cce3e8a2e2e5e4a2ebe3fa"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4e3d3e2f2b3a26240e212a6020272660292138">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: December 3, 2014.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-28750 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4816 

AN ACT 

To permit the Librarian of Congress to hire 

Library of Congress Police employees. 


erjones on PROD1PC71 with BILLS

erjones on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4816 

AN ACT 

To permit the Librarian of Congress to hire Library of 

Congress Police employees. 

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


erjones on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4816 EH 

1 SECTION 1. PERMITTING LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS TO 

2 HIRE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS POLICE EM3 PLOYEES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1006 of the Legislative 

5 Branch Appropriations Act, 2004 (2 U.S.C. 1901 note), 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘TRAINING, DE8 TAILING, AND HIRING’’ and inserting ‘‘TRAINING

9 AND DETAILING’’; 

10 (2) by striking ‘‘(a)’’ and the heading of sub11 section (a); 

12 (3) by striking subsection (b) and redesignating 

13 paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) as sub14 sections (a) and (b); and 

15 (4) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated), by 

16 striking ‘‘paragraph (1)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection 

17 (a)’’. 

18 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 subsection (a) shall take effect as if included in the enact20 ment of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2004. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 20, 2004. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 


erjones on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                       REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Stockholder of
ANR Pipeline Company:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements in the Index appearing
under Item 14(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of ANR Pipeline Company as of December 31, 2001, and the
consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then
ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Company's management; our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit of these
statements in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America, which require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing
the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

As discussed in Note 9, the Company changed its actuarial measurement date for
measuring pension and other postretirement benefit obligations from December 31
to September 30.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Houston, Texas
March 6, 2002
**Exhibit31(b)**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Jeffery R. Gardner, Executive Vice President - Chief FinancialOfficer of ALLTEL Corporation, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annualreport on Form 10-K of ALLTEL Corporation;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) 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 registrant and have:

 

(a)       Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)       Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)       Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):

 

(a)       All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b)       Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: March 5, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Jeffery R. Gardner                             |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Jeffery R. Gardner                                 |
| Executive Vice President - Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS,
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 SHOWN ELSEWHERE IN THIS REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          56,453
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,861,072
<ALLOWANCES>                                   794,687
<INVENTORY>                                 12,699,735
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,392,698
<PP&E>                                       3,264,240
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,670,189
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              30,303,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,837,909
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,002
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,868,906
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                30,303,200
<SALES>                                     35,623,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,623,961
<CGS>                                       28,858,157
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,528,818
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 6,408
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,156,203
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,111,165)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,060
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,112,225)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,112,225)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.28)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT (21)

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT  

Mueller International Sales Corporation, a Foreign Sales Corporation organized on December 18, 1984, and incorporated under the laws of the Virgin Islands of the United States, became active in 1985 and its dissolution was completed July 27, 2001.  

Mueller Transportation, Inc., a Missouri Corporation, was incorporated on October 15, 1996, and is a wholly owned subsidiary that began operations effective January 1, 1997.  Its accounts have been included in the Consolidated Financial Statements filed herein.  

Mueller Field Operations, Inc., a Missouri Corporation, was incorporated on January 28, 1998, and is a wholly owned subsidiary that began operations effective January 28, 1998.  Its accounts have been included in the Consolidated Financial Statements filed herein.  

 

129

=======================================================================
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7201
RANDOLPH EDISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM SMITH, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-95- 3071-MJG) Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: April 25, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Randolph Edison, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuantto 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Appellant that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the r ecommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommendation.The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. We accordingly deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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