alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment 2 To


 


DEFERRED COMPENSATION DEFERRAL AND CONVERSION
OPTION AGREEMENT


 


This Agreement (the “Amendment Agreement”) is an
amendment to the DEFERRED COMPENSATION DEFERRAL AND CONVERSION OPTION AGREEMENT dated the 27th day of March, 2013 (“Conversion
Option Agreement”), by and between PAUL J. TRAVERS ("Executive"), and VUZIX CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation
("Company").


 


In consideration of the mutual covenants
and agreements contained herein and in the Conversion Option Agreement, the parties agree to amend the Conversion Option Agreement
effective immediately as follows:


 


		1.	Paragraph 5 (a) (v) of the Conversion Option Agreement as amended currently provides that:



 


5 (a) (v) Before June 30, 2013, the Company shall
have consummated a public offering of its securities as described in its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-185661),
as amended.


 


The Conversion Option Agreement Paragraph
5 (a) (v) is hereby amended to state:


 


			5 (a) (v) Before August 31, 2013, the Company shall have
                                                              consummated a public offering of its securities as described in
                                                              its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-185661), as
                                                              amended.



 


		2.	Paragraph 5 (b) (iii) of the Conversion Option Agreement currently provides that:



 


5 (b) (iii) Before June 30, 2013, the Company shall
have consummated a public offering of its securities as described in its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-185661),
as amended.


 


The Conversion Option Agreement Paragraph 5 (b) (iii)
is hereby amended to state:


 


5 (b) (iii) Before August 31 2013, the Company
shall have consummated a public offering of its securities as described in its Registration Statement on Form S-1(File No. 333-185661)
, as amended.


 


		3.	All provisions and terms making reference to or subject to the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange (“TSXV”) or
listing thereon shall be deleted and removed from the Conversion Agreement and any amendments there to.



 


		4.	All other provisions and terms of the Conversion Option Agreement and any amendments thereto shall remain the in effect in
accordance with their original terms.



 




    	 



    	 



    

  


EXECUTED on this 26th day of July 2013.


 


	Company: Vuzix Corporation	Executive: Paul Travers
	 	 
	By: /s/ Grant Russell	/s/ Paul Travers
	 	 
	Name:  Grant Russell     	Paul Travers
	Title:  CFO
NUMBER 13-15-00263-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellant,

v.

GABRIELA NOEHMI GARZA, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 107th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Texas Department of Public Safety, perfected an appeal from an order 

of expunction entered by the 107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas on December 

15, 2014 in cause number 2014-DCL-6585-A. Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss 

this appeal on grounds that, for the sake of judicial economy, it no longer wishes to appeal 
2

this case. Appellee, Gabriela Noehmi Garza, is not opposed to the motion to dismiss the 

appeal. 

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s motion to 

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a). Appellant’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby 

DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) 

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

9th day of July, 2015.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

SHAQUAN MCNEIL,

Defendant BelowAppellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff BelowAppellee.

§

§ No. 113, 2016

§

§

§ Court Below—Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ Cr. ID Nos. 1409006640 and

§ 1409006067

§

§

Submitted: April 13, 2016

 Decided: May 23, 2016

Before HOLLAND, VALIHURA, and VAUGHN, Justices.

O R D E R

This 23rd day of May 2016, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On March 9, 2016, the Court received the appellant’s notice of 

appeal from his Superior Court sentence imposed on February 5, 2016. 

Under Supreme Court Rule 6(a)(iii), a timely notice of appeal should have 

been filed on or before March 7, 2016.

(2) The Clerk issued a notice directing the appellant to show cause 

why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely.1 The appellant did not 

file a response to the notice to show cause. Although the Court could have 

deemed dismissal of this appeal to be unopposed under Rule 3(b)(2), we 

 

1Del. Supr. Ct. R. 29(b) (2016).
2

instead directed the lawyer who represented the appellant in the Superior 

Court proceedings to file a response to the notice to show cause. Counsel 

filed his response on April 7, 2016, asserting that the sentencing order from 

which the appellant filed his pro se notice of appeal was imposed after the 

entry of a negotiated guilty plea. Counsel states that the appellant 

acknowledged as part of that plea that he was waiving his right to file an 

appeal. Thus, counsel did not file a notice of appeal on the appellant’s 

behalf. 

(3) The State filed a reply on April 13, 2016, stating that this Court 

lacks jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s untimely appeal. We agree. 

Time is a jurisdictional requirement.

2

 A notice of appeal must be received

by the Office of the Clerk of this Court within the applicable time period in 

order to be effective.3 Unless the appellant can demonstrate that the failure 

to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court personnel, his appeal 

cannot be considered.4 

(4) There is no suggestion that the appellant’s untimely filing in 

this case is attributable to court personnel. Consequently, this case does not 

fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of 

 

2Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).

3Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a) (2016).

4

Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
3

a notice of appeal. Thus, the Court concludes that the within appeal must be 

dismissed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 

29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice
#### Mary Ward et al., Appellants, v Walter Engel, Jr., Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 608]

*791In an action to recover damages for dental malpractice, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated September 12, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

Bare denials which do not address the specific allegations of malpractice set forth in the plaintiffs verified bill of particulars are insufficient to establish entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Hutchinson v Bernstein,*22 AD3d 527 [2005]; *Johnson v Ladin,*18 AD3d 439 [2005]; *Drago v King,*283 AD2d 603, 604 [2001]; *Allen v Blum,*212 AD2d 562 [1995]).

In support of his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant submitted the affidavit of his dental expert who stated only that the defendant performed the subject crown procedure within good and accepted standards of dental care and that an abrasion of the patient’s tongue is a well known risk of the procedure. The expert’s affidavit failed to address any of the specific allegations of malpractice set forth in the plaintiffs’ bill of particulars. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied without considering the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ papers in opposition *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Crane, J.E, Ritter, Rivera and Lunn, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 2-72576) pertaining to the 1981 Stock Purchase Plan, the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-34107) pertaining to the Baldwin & Lyons, Inc.
Deferred Directors Fee Option Plan, and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-31316) pertaining to the Baldwin & Lyons, Inc. Employee Discounted Stock
Option Plan of our reports dated March 10, 2006, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedules of Baldwin & Lyons, Inc.,
Baldwin & Lyons, Inc. management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Baldwin & Lyons, Inc., included in the Annual Report
(Form 10K) for the year ended December 31, 2005.



                                                     /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Indianapolis, Indiana
March 10, 2006
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 117 (Friday, June 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14492]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6678]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Vermeer's Masterpiece, The Milkmaid''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 
of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of 
April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the object to be 
included in the exhibition ``Vermeer's Masterpiece, The Milkmaid,'' 
imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, 
is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan 
agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at the Metropolitan 
Museum of Art, New York, NY, from on or about September 9, 2009, until 
on or about November 29, 2009, and at possible additional exhibitions 
or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public 
Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Carol B. Epstein, Attorney-
Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 
(telephone: 202/453-8048). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-
44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: June 12, 2009.
C. Miller Crouch,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-14492 Filed 6-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
# Medical Research Initiatives
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

The following entities, unless otherwise indicated, are wholly-owned direct or
indirect subsidiaries of the Registrant as of December 31, 2002:

                                                          State or Country
      Name                                                of Organization
      ----                                                ----------------

 1.   Baker Environmental, Inc.                           Pennsylvania
 2.   Baker Heavy & Highway, Inc.                         Pennsylvania
 3.   Baker Mellon Stuart Construction, Inc.              Pennsylvania
 4.   Mellon Stuart Building Services, Inc.               Pennsylvania
 5.   Mellon Stuart Construction International, Inc.      Pennsylvania
 6.   Michael Baker Global, Inc.                          Pennsylvania
 7.   Michael Baker Jr., Inc.                             Pennsylvania
 8.   Michael Baker Alaska, Inc.                          Alaska
 9.   Baker Construction, Inc.                            Delaware
10.   Baker Global Project Services, Inc.                 Delaware
11.   Baker Holding Corporation                           Delaware
12.   Baker/OTS, Inc.                                     Delaware
13.   International Pipeline Services, Inc.               Delaware
14.   Michael Baker International, Inc.                   Delaware
15.   Baker GeoResearch, Inc.                             District of Columbia
16.   Baker Engineering, Inc.                             Illinois
17.   Steen Production Services, Inc.                     Louisiana
18.   Michael Baker Jr. Company                           Nevada
19.   Michael Baker Architects/Engineers, P.C.            New Jersey
20.   Baker Engineering NY, Inc.                          New York
21.   Baker/MO Services, Inc.                             Texas
22.   Vermont General Insurance Company                   Vermont
23.   Michael Baker Barbados Ltd.                         Barbados
24.   Baker Energy International, Ltd.                    Cayman Islands
25.   Baker O&M International, Ltd.                       Cayman Islands
26.   Baker/OTS International, Inc.                       Cayman Islands
27.   Overseas Technical Services (Middle East) Ltd.      Cayman Islands
28.   Michael Baker de Mexico S.A. de C.V.                Mexico
29.   OTS International Training Services Ltd.            United Kingdom
30.   Overseas Technical Services (Harrow) Ltd.           United Kingdom
31.   Baker/OTS Ltd.                                      United Kingdom
32.   SD Forty-Five Ltd.                                  United Kingdom
33.   Hanseatic Oilfield Services Ltd.                    Vanuatu
34.   OTS Finance and Management Ltd.                     Vanuatu
35.   Overseas Technical Service International Ltd.       Vanuatu
|    |                                                                                                                       |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |

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

|                    |
|--------------------|
|                    |  |  |
| Date:  May 2, 2013 |   | /s/ David H. Dingus |
|               |   | David H. Dingus |
|               |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellant,

v.

ISELA DOMINGUEZ,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-14-00011-CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 7

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20110C10845)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the 

judgment. We therefore reverse the trial court’s order granting motion for new trial and reinstate 

Appellant’s conviction, in accordance with this Court’s opinion. We further order this decision 

shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2015.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 23**

Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the following Registration Statements of The Black & Decker Corporationof our reports dated February 14, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedule of The Black & Decker Corporation and Subsidiaries, The Black & DeckerCorporation and Subsidiaries’ management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting of The Black & Decker Corporation and Subsidiaries, included in this Annual Report (Form10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006. 

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG, LLP
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 192 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 192

    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Homeland 
            Security in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 7, 2019

  Mr. Thompson of Mississippi (for himself and Mr. Rogers of Alabama) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                        on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Homeland 
            Security in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Homeland Security (hereafter 
in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the 
expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 
applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for committee 
salaries and expenses, not more than $17,832,436 for the One Hundred 
Sixteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $8,718,127 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2019, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2020; and
            (2) not more than $9,114,309 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2020, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2021.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 289 

Condemning the Nation of Brunei’s criminalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, 

and transgender individuals and imposition of cruel and disproportionate 

forms of punishment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 3, 2019 

Mr. POCAN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned 

RESOLUTION 

Condemning the Nation of Brunei’s criminalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals and imposition of cruel and disproportionate forms of punishment. 

Whereas, on April 3, 2019, a brutal new penal code went into 

effect in the country of Brunei; 

Whereas Brunei’s penal code imposes death by stoning for 

same-sex relations and adultery; 

Whereas stoning is a cruel and torturous form of punishment; and 

Whereas the U.S. Department of State has stated that ‘‘the 

United States strongly opposes violence, criminalization 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 289 IH 

and discrimination targeting vulnerable groups, including 

women at risk of violence, religious and ethnic minorities, 

and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex 

(LGBTI) persons.’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) condemns the criminalization of and dis3 crimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgen4 der and intersex individuals; 

5 (2) condemns Brunei’s decision to criminalize 

6 sex between persons of the same sex; 

7 (3) condemns Brunei’s decision to impose dis8 proportionate punishments for crimes; 

9 (4) encourages the international community to 

10 join the U.S. House of Representatives in con11 demning Brunei’s new penal code and upholding 

12 international norms; 

13 (5) directs the U.S. Department of State to up14 date all human rights reports submitted to Congress 

15 and the President immediately to document the se16 verity of Brunei’s new penal code; and 

17 (6) calls on Brunei to reverse its new penal 

18 code as expeditiously as possible. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
EX-10.9



 Exhibit 10.9 
 Management Compensation-Cash Bonus Pool (CBP). 
 A CBP will be calculated annually. The
calculation will be comprised of: 
  

	 	•	 	 22.5% of Calendar Year Underwriting Profit; plus 


  

	 	•	 	 12.5% of the investment income on the float generated by underwriting operations. 



The CBP will be subject to a minimum value of 50% of total earned annual salaries in the respective year and a maximum value of 300% of the earned annual
salaries in the respective year. 
 The CBP will be subject to the following terms and conditions: 

 

	 	•	 	 In regard to the underwriting profit component of the CBP: 



 

	 	•	 	 There will be no claw backs or roll forwards of underwriting losses. 



 

	 	•	 	 The minimum underwriting result contribution in any year is zero. 



 

	 	•	 	 In regard to the investment income component of the CBP: 



 

	 	•	 	 The interest rate used will be the actual investment return as generated by Third Point LLC on the Third Point Re funds managed by Third Point LLC.



  

	 	•	 	 The interest rate used cannot be negative. 


  

	 	•	 	 There will be no compound interest on the float generated by underwriting operations. 



 

	 	•	 	 Investment income on the Company’s surplus will not be included in this calculation. 



 

	 	•	 	 Management share compensation expense will not be included in the CBP calculation. 



 

	 	•	 	 Income from Deposit Accounting contracts less interest credited will be considered investment income. 



 

	 	•	 	 Income from the fees generated by The Cat Fund will included in the Underwriting Profit Calculation. 



The Chairman and CEO of the company will make individual cash bonus recommendations to the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors for approval
by the Board of Directors. 
 Definitions to be included: 
  

	 	•	 	 Calendar Year Experience-Simplistically, the matching of all losses incurred (not necessarily occurring) within a given twelve-month period, usually
beginning on January 1, with all premium earned within the same period of time. Incurred losses will include the change in IBNR. Losses incurred are equal to the sum of losses paid, plus the outstanding loss reserves at the end of the year, lest the
outstanding loss reserves at the beginning of the year. Once calculated for a given period, calendar year experience never changes.