alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CONN 2015.4.30 EX 10.2


Exhibit 10.2


CONN’S, INC. 
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR RESTRICTED STOCK PLAN 
Non-Employee Director’s Restricted Stock Units — Deferral Election Form 
A Participant in the Conn’s, Inc. Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Plan (the “Plan”) may use this form to elect to defer all or a portion of the Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”) that may be granted to the Participant in _____ under the Plan. If you elect deferral, your ____ RSUs will be settled in accordance with your elections and other terms set forth below.  Deferrals are subject to all terms of the Plan, the applicable Award Agreement, and any procedures adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Conn’s, Inc. (the “Company”) hereunder (collectively, the “Governing Documents”), which terms are incorporated herein by reference. In the event of your death, any vested and unsettled RSUs will be paid to, as applicable, your designated beneficiary or your estate in a single lump sum payment. 
NOTE: If you fail to timely return this Deferral Election Form on or before ________________, you will be deemed to have elected not to defer any portion of the RSUs that may be granted to you. Your prior year’s election (if any) will not carry over. 



    


Exhibit 10.2


	
							
	1.
	Name:________________________________

	 
	 

	2.
	 
	I elect to defer _____% of the RSUs, if any, that may be granted to me by the Company on the day of or the day following the Company’s _____ annual meeting of stockholders (the “Covered RSUs”). 

	 
	 

	3.
	 
	Event that will trigger distribution and settlement of the Covered RSUs that vest (select only one):

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 ̈
	At fixed date of _______ ___, 20__.

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 ̈
	Upon attainment of age ____.

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 ̈
	Upon my separation from service (as defined in Section 409A of the Code) with the Company.

	 
	 

	4.
	 
	Form of distribution and settlement of the Covered RSUs that vest (select only one):

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 ̈
	Lump sum distribution of shares of Common Stock.

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 ̈
	Equal annual installments of shares of Common Stock over a fixed period of ____ years (not exceeding five), commencing within 30 days of the selected distribution date under Item 3, above, with subsequent installments within 30 days of each following January 31.  Each installment payment is to be treated as a right to a separate payment for purposes of Section 409A of the Code.

	 

	The undersigned hereby elects to defer receipt of the Covered RSUs in accordance with the Governing Documents and the elections set forth above. The undersigned acknowledges that this election will become irrevocable with respect to the Covered RSUs on _______________________.  





	

Date:__________________


	 
	 

	Director Signature: ___________________________________

	 
	 

	



You must return this form on or before _______________________ to:


Conn’s, Inc.
Attn: General Counsel
4055 Technology Forest Blvd
The Woodlands, TX 77381
Fax: 877-303-2445
Electronic Mail: Generalcounsel@conns.com
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - RIN 0648-XD658

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's Pacific Northwest Crab Industry Advisory Committee (PNCIAC) will meet in Seattle, WA. The meeting is open to the public.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on January 15, 2015, from 9 a.m. until 12 noon.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Fishermen's Terminal, Norby Conference Room, 3919 18th Avenue W, Seattle, WA 98199.

*Council address:*                         North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Diana Stram, Council Staff, (907) 271-2809 or Lance Farr, (206) 669-7163.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Committee will discuss issues to recommend for the 10-year review of the Crab Rationalization Program.

## Special Accommodations

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen at (907) 271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date.

Dated: December 9, 2014.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2014-29168 Filed 12-11-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77530-77531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30164]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-82,346]


Whirlpool Corporation; Including On-Site Leased Workers From 
Aerotek/Tek Systems (Subcontractor of IBM Corporation), Jones Lang 
Lasalle, and Otterbase, Inc. Fort Smith, Arkansas; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on May 10, 2013, applicable to workers of Whirlpool Corporation, 
including on-site leased workers from Aerotek/Tek Systems 
(subcontractor of

[[Page 77531]]

IBM Corporation), Fort Smith, Arkansas. The Department's notice of 
determination was published in the Federal Register on May 30, 2013 (78 
FR 32464).
    At the request of the State Workforce Office, the Department 
reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers 
were engaged in production of refrigerators and trash compactors as 
well as decommissioning work for the facility closure.
    The Department confirmed that workers leased from Jones Lang 
LaSalle and Otterbase, Inc. were employed on-site at the Fort Smith, 
Arkansas location of Whirlpool Corporation. The Department has 
determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of 
the subject firm to be considered leased workers.
    Based on these findings, the Department is amending this 
certification to include workers leased from Otterbase, Inc. working 
on-site at the Fort Smith, Arkansas location of Whirlpool Corporation.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-82,346 is hereby issued as 
follows:

All workers of Whirlpool Corporation, including on-site leased 
workers from Aerotek/Tek Systems (subcontractor of IBM Corporation), 
Jones Lang LaSalle, and Otterbase, Inc., Fort Smith, Arkansas, who 
became totally or partially separated from employment on or after 
October 7, 2012 through May 10, 2015, and all workers in the group 
threatened with total or partial separation from employment on the 
date of certification through May 10, 2015, are eligible to apply 
for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade 
Act of 1974, as amended.


    Signed in Washington, DC, this 11th day of December, 2014.
Michael W. Jaffe,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-30164 Filed 12-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

___________________________

No. 97-20644

___________________________

RICHARD H. WAVRO,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas (Houston Division)

(96-CV-3222)

 ___________________________________________________

January 13, 1998

Before King, Higginbotham, and Davis, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Two issues worthy of discussion are presented in this appeal:

(1) whether the district court erred in refusing to remand this

case to state court; and (2) whether the mailbox rule applies to

these facts, making the district court’s grant of summary judgment

to the Appellee inappropriate.

Wavro first contends that because the amount in controversy

did not exceed $50,000, the district court erred in refusing to
 

1 Although the jurisdictional amount was raised to $75,000,

this action was both filed and removed before that statutory

change. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Supp. 1997).

2

remand his case to the state court. 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (1993).1

Wavro's claims included one for his property damage ($10,729.10)

and one for reimbursement of claims made against him ($14,944.78),

as well as claims for punitive damages, multiple damages and

attorney’s fees. Wavro provided no convincing evidence that the

amount in controversy was less than $50,000. We therefore agree

with the district court's order denying Wavro's motion to remand.

Wavro argues next that the “mail box rule” applies to this

case, making the district court’s grant of summary judgment

inappropriate. The Appellant failed to send the renewal premium

for his insurance policy, and therefore the policy expired by its

terms. The Appellee then offered to renew the policy if the

premium payment in response to the offer was received by February

10, 1996. The Appellee's offer expressly stated that: 

The renewal premium for this automobile policy has not

been received. Accordingly, this policy expired

effective 12:01 a.m. standard time January 27, 1996.

However, if amount due is received before February 10,

1996, coverage will be reinstated without interruption.

The Appellant mailed the renewal premium on February 7, 1996, but

the Appellee did not receive it until February 14, 1996. If the

mail box rule applies, this was a timely acceptance and summary

judgment was inappropriate.

We agree with the district court that the terms of the

contract preclude application of the mail box rule. The district
3

court correctly resolved this issue against the Appellant and

correctly granted summary judgment to the Appellee. 

AFFIRMED.
#### *In re*Murnane *et al.*

*(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.*

April 18, 1889.)

Immigration—Board of Commission'krs -Deregation of Powers.

The board of commissioners of emigration, who by act Cong. Aug. 3, 1882. are required to examine into the condition of immigrants, cannot delegate to a committee the power to determine whether such immigrants shall be permitted to land.

*Habeas Corpus*for the release of detained immigrants.

*Alfred Sleekier,*for petitioners.

*Kelly & Macrae,*for Board of Emigration Commissioners.

*Abram, J. Rose,*Asst. U. S. Atty., for Collector.

Lacombe, J.,

(orally.) The return presented by the commissioners of emigration in this ease was prepared so as to state a legal conclusion, it being contended in their behalf that the action of the Castle Garden committee, to whom by resolution they have undertaken to delegate their powers, is of the same legal effect as would be the action of the commissioners themselves. Their counsel, however, in ojien court, concedes that, except so far as said Castle Garden committee has taken action in regard to these immigrants, there has been no action had by the board of commissioners of emigration. That board, in fact, have not had a meeting since the arrival of relators, on April 10th. The next regular meeting day will be April 25th. Attention has been called to the decision of Judge Brown in *Re*Bracmadfar, 37 Fed. Rep. 774. There, however, the present point was neither raised nor argued, and the suggestion at the close of the memorandum is wholly *obiter.*The second section of the act of August 3, 1882, requires the determination as to the condition of immigrants to be had by the board of commissioners. For the purpose of enabling and assisting them to make such examination, they are authorized, either individually or through persons whom they may appoint, to go on board any ship or vessel bringing immigrants to this port, but this permission is not to be construed as authorizing them to delegate to any persons other than themselves the important *functions—qvmi*judicial in their character— which are by that act confided to them. 01' course, a reasonable time should be allowed the commissioners of emigration to examine into the facts, which they may gather either by their own observation as a body, or by their individual exertions, or from the reports made to them by the agents they may employ. It is hard to say in advance what in each particular instance should be considered a reasonable time, but in view of the fact that their action in this particular case has been framed to meet the suggestion contained in the case above cited, and that a meeting of the commissioners at which action can be had will take jilace within a week, and that their agents have already reported to them adversely to the application of the relators in this case, a delay until the *100day after such meeting of the commissioners will not be unreasonable. The relators will therefore be remanded, and further proceedings upon this writ suspended, until the 26th of April, at 11 a. m.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,009
<SECURITIES>                                       916
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,584
<ALLOWANCES>                                        27
<INVENTORY>                                      3,598
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,721
<PP&E>                                           7,086
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,507
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,257
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,916
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         42
<COMMON>                                           212
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    44,257
<SALES>                                          6,802
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,007
<CGS>                                            6,042
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,042
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,276
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 958
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,578)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        39
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,617)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    (20)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,637)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.28)
        

</TABLE>
----

|   | 1. | The                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended                September 30, 2006, (the "Quarterly Report"), fully complies with                the                requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities                Exchange                Act of 1934, as amended; |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Paul O. Koether                   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Paul                O. Koether                       |
| Chairman                                             |
|                                                 |   |
|                                                 |   |
| /s/                Bryan P. Healey                   |   |
| Bryan                P. Healey                       |
| Chief                Financial Officer and Secretary |

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

COREY A. HUTCHERSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-00397-CG-N

)

INTERNATIONAL MARINE AND 

INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS, 

LLC,

)

)

)

)

Defendant. )

FINAL JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Orders granting Defendant’s motions for summary 

judgment, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that JUDGMENT is 

entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff, Corey A. Hutcherson. It is, 

therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant are hereby 

DISMISSED with prejudice. Costs are to be taxed against Plaintiff.

DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of April, 2016.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00397-CG-N Document 63 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 1
#### Phyllis G. Sternlicht, Appellant, v Daniel R. Ferrara et al., Respondents.

[826 NYS2d 371]

In an action, inter alia, for breach of a contract for the sale of real property, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated March 22, 2005, as denied those branches of her motion which were for summary judgment on the first and third causes of action in the complaint and to dismiss the defendants’ first counterclaim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the particular circumstances of this case, a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the plaintiffs notice on January 26, 2004, setting a closing for February 17, 2004, was reasonable *(see Ben Zev v Merman,*73 NY2d 781, 783 [1988]; *Miller v Almquist,*241 AD2d 181, 185-186 [1998]). The defendants also raised a triable issue of fact as to the reasonableness of selecting a law date for a time the defendants’ attorney was known to be unavailable or whether the defendants’ attorney was acting unreasonably in failing to make himself available at the scheduled closing or any agreed-upon closing date. Adams, J.P, Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1873 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1873

   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for House of 
   Representatives, Office of the Minority Whip for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for House of 
   Representatives, Office of the Minority Whip for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR HOUSE OF 
              REPRESENTATIVES, OFFICE OF THE MINORITY WHIP FOR FISCAL 
              YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for House of Representatives, 
Office of the Minority Whip for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 
$1,700,079.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TILLMAN NORTH, :

Plaintiff, :

:

v. : CIVIL ACTION 15-00009-KD-C

:

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERRIFF’S :

DEPARTMENT, et al., :

Defendants. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the 

issues raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and dated August 27, 2015, is 

ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant 

to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure based upon plaintiff’s failure to prosecute 

this action and failure to fully comply with the Court’s March 23, 2015 Order.

DONE and ORDERED this the 25th day of September 2015.

/s/ Kristi K. DuBose

KRISTI K. DuBOSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:15-cv-00009-KD-C Document 15 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 1
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1907 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Joint Items, Senate 

Office Buildings for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Joint 

Items, Senate Office Buildings for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 JOINT ITEMS, SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS 

5 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Joint Items, Senate Office Buildings for fiscal 

9 year 2024 may not exceed $81,977,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB