alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3

 

AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO

SENOMYX, INC.

2004 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

 

This Amendment No. 1 (this “Amendment”) to the Senomyx, Inc. 2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, dated as of June 13, 2013 (the “Effective Date”), is made by Senomyx, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).

 

WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Senomyx, Inc. 2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company on April 30, 2004) (the “Plan”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to increase the number of shares of common stock of the Company (“Common Stock”) available for issuance under the Plan with respect to offerings that commence after such share increase; and

 

WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to provide that, effective as of the Effective Date, an additional three million (3,000,000) shares of Common Stock will be reserved and available for issuance under the Plan with respect to offerings that commence after such share increase; and

 

WHEREAS, Section 15(a) of the Plan authorizes the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) to so amend the Plan.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Board hereby amends the Plan as follows:

 

1.             Amendment to Section 2.  Section 2 is hereby amended by adding the following new definition as Section 2(a) of Section 2 and re-lettering the subsections for each succeeding definition thereafter.

 

(a)           “Amendment Date” means the date on which Amendment No. 1 to the Plan is adopted and approved by the stockholders of the Company.

 

2.             Amendment to Section 4.  Section 4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following sentences:

 

Subject to the provisions of Section 14(a) relating to adjustments upon changes in Common Stock, effective as of the Amendment Date, the shares of Common Stock that may be sold pursuant to Purchase Rights granted under the Plan shall not exceed in the aggregate three million fifty-two thousand four hundred ninety three (3,052,493) shares of Common Stock, which is equal to the sum of (A) three million (3,000,000) new shares of Common Stock (the “New Shares”) and (B) fifty-two thousand four hundred ninety three (52,9430) shares currently available (the “Share Reserve”).  The New Shares will be available only for Offerings that commence after the Amendment Date.

 

3.             Ratification.  All other provisions of the Plan remain unchanged and are hereby ratified by the Company and the Board.

 

4.             Effective Date.  This Amendment shall be effective as of the date set forth in the first sentence of this Amendment.

 

*              *              *
#### In the Matter of Eugene Chmura, an Attorney, Appellant. Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh and Thirteenth Judicial Districts, Respondent.

Submitted November 26, 2012;

decided December 18, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal denied. Motion for a stay dismissed as academic.
<PAGE>   1
              Exhibit 10(xxii)



                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO

                             ST. PAUL BANCORP, INC.

                        ST. PAUL FEDERAL BANK FOR SAVINGS

                      EMPLOYEE SEVERANCE COMPENSATION PLAN


         WHEREAS, St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. (the "Holding Company") and St. Paul
Federal Bank (the "Bank") adopted an Employee Severance Compensation Plan (the
"Plan") on December 20, 1993; and

         WHEREAS, in order to assist in the recruiting of employees, on October
26, 1998 the Board of Directors of the Bank and the Holding Company approved
certain modifications to the Plan;

         NOW, THEREFORE, effective October 26, 1998 the Plan is hereby amended
as follows:

1.       Section 2.13 of the Plan is hereby amended to read as follows:

                  "2.13 Eligible Employee means any Employee who has completed
         at least one (1) Year of Benefit Service, excluding any person who is a
         party to a written employment agreement or termination or severance
         agreement with the Employer"

2.       Section 4.1 (b) of the Plan is hereby amended to add the following
sentence to the end of Subsection 4.1 (b) ( i ) :

                  "Notwithstanding the foregoing, the lump-sum severance payment
         to any officer of an Employer shall not be less than (a) in the case of
         an officer with the title of Vice President and higher, 6/12 multiplied
         by the Eligible Employee's Compensation paid during the twelve (12)
         months ended on the Date of Termination, and (b) in the case of an
         officer with a title ranked lower than Vice President, 3/12 multiplied
         by the Eligible Employee's Compensation paid during the twelve (12)
         months ended on the Date of Termination."

3.       In all other respects, the terms of the Plan shall remain unchanged
and in full force and effect after the date hereof.

         Executed as of October 26, 1998

ST. PAUL BANCORP, INC.                            ATTEST:

By:
   --------------------------------               ------------------------------
Its:                                              SECRETARY
    -------------------------------


ST. PAUL FEDERAL BANK FOR SAVINGS                 ATTEST:

By:
   --------------------------------               ------------------------------
Its:                                              SECRETARY
    -------------------------------



                                       45
Exhibit 32.2

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 LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Chris A.
Walker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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 position and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 15, 2009



/s/ Chris A. WalkerChris A. WalkerChief Financial Officer
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

‘Supreme Court
oF
NevaDa

(0) 1947 <EB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF THE No. 67987 FI L E B
HONORABLE MICHELLE LEAVITT,
EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,

DEPT. 12, COUNTY OF CLARK, STATE JUL 15 2015
OF NEVADA. “ Sie

CHIEF DE! ir CERI

ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE

This matter was docketed in this court on May 13, 2015, with
the filing of a certified copy of the Stipulation and Order for Public
Reprimand. See Procedural Rules of the Nevada Commission on Judicial
Discipline (“PRJDC”), Rule 28(2) (upon the filing of adoption and filing of a
decision, the commission must file a certified copy of the decision with the
clerk of the supreme court). Respondent did not subsequently file a notice
of. appeal with the clerk of the commission. See PRJDC 34(2); NRAP
3D(d). Accordingly, the clerk of this court is directed to administratively
close this matter.

It is so ORDERED.

[Su heD, , Cd.

ce: Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline
Law Offices of Kermitt L. Waters

15-2141)

SA
Exhibit 32.2

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 LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Chris A. Walker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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 position and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 12, 2010



/s/ Chris A. WalkerChris A. WalkerChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 21

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF BANTA CORPORATION

                                          OWNERSHIP BY
                                        BANTA CORPORATION  STATE OR JURISDICTION
                                         OR ONE OF ITS       OF INCORPORATION
LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES                      SUBSIDIARIES        OR ORGANIZATION
--------------------                   ------------------   --------------------
Banta Direct Marketing, Inc.                  100%               Minnesota
Banta Europe Corp.                            100%                Ireland
Banta Healthcare Products, Inc.               100%               Wisconsin
Banta Security Printing, Inc.                 100%               Wisconsin
Banta Global Turnkey B.V.                     100%            The Netherlands
Banta Global Turnkey France                   100%                France
Banta Global Turnkey Limited                  100%                Ireland
Banta Global Turnkey Limited                  100%               Scotland
Banta Packaging & Fulfillment, Inc.           100%               Wisconsin
Banta Software Services
 International, Inc.                          100%               Minnesota
Banta Specialty Converting, Inc.              100%               Wisconsin
Danbury Printing & Litho, Inc.                100%               Minnesota
KnowledgeSet Corporation                      100%              California
New Frontiers Information Corporation         100%             Massachusetts
One Pass Network, Inc.                        100%              California
United Graphics Inc.                          100%              Washington
Wrapper, Inc.                                 100%               Wisconsin
Banta Publications-Greenfield, Inc.           100%                 Ohio
Cidex International, Inc.                     100%               Wisconsin
Banta Direct Marketing-Berkeley, Inc.         100%               Minnesota
Omnia I, Inc.                                 100%               Delaware
Tidi Products, Inc.                           100%               Delaware
Meadows Information Systems, Inc.             100%               Wisconsin
Greenfield Holdings Corp.                     100%               Delaware
Banta Cayman Islands Corp.                    100%            Cayman Islands
Type Designs, Inc.                            100%`               Georgia
Ad Run Around, Inc.                           100%                Georgia
Banta Ireland Corp.                           100%               Wisconsin
Turnkey Services Holding Corp.                100%               Wisconsin
Banta Holding Corp.                           100%               Wisconsin
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 Sentry Petroleum Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Iynky Maheswaran, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 14th day of October, 2008.

| |     |                                                           
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------
| | BY: | IYNKY MAHESWARANIynky Maheswaran, 
Chief Financial Officer
Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes o No x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)

Yes o No x

 

**APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS:**

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court.

Yes o No o

 

**APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS:**

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of November 15, 2006:

5,055,000
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Summit Exploration Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended August 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Alan Hart, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 5th day of October, 2006.

BY:
/s/ ALAN HART                        Alan  Hart, Principal Executive Officer **
#### KRAUSE v. GEORGE K. GARRETT CO., INC.

Civ. A. No. 845.

District Court, D. Delaware.

July 12, 1946.

E. Ennalls Berl, of Southerland, Berl *&*Potter, all of Wilmington, Del., Samuel E. Darby and Russell G. Pelton, both of New York City, and Virgil E. Woodcock, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Wm. H. Bennethum, Marvel & Morford, and Arthur G. Connolly, all of Wilmington, Del., and Leonard L. Kalish, of Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

LEAHY, District Judge.

1. This matter came on for hearing on application of plaintiff for a preliminary injunction and defendant’s motion for summary judgment filed before answer. These matters were heard on the pleadings, affidavits and exhibits. During the course of the argument, when it seemed there was no genuine issue of fact between the parties, it was suggested and stipulated that, although plaintiff had no right to move for summary judgment until after defendant’s answer was filed, plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction should likewise be considered as a motion for summary judgment. After the hearing on the three motions and several weeks later, plaintiff sought to file an additional affidavit which states that certain exhibits attached to his first affidavit were filed by inadvertence because they do not represent the actual facts concerning plaintiff’s advertising program; and plaintiff points out the necessity to bring the true facts before the court in order to answer a certain argument raised by defendant in its brief in opposition to the motion for a preliminary injunction and in support of defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

2. After hearing further argument on whether plaintiff should be per*386mitted to file his additional affidavit and after reviewing the moving papers in support of the motions for preliminary injunction and summary judgment, I believe there appears important and genuine issues of fact as to whether a fiduciary relationship existed between the parties. One fact is definite: Defendant copied plaintiff’s dies. As the question of fiduciary relationship is basic, under these circumstances, I cannot resolve it by reading further affidavits and counter-affidavits. Reynolds International Pen Co. v. Eversharp, D.C.Del., 63 F.Supp. 423. As defendant appears to be financially responsible, there is no undue hardship in denying the preliminary injunction at this time.

3. The practical expedient would be to call a pre-trial conference before final hearing in an effort to ascertain what material facts exist without substantial controversy and what material facts are actually and in good faith controverted. Counsel could arrive at such a conference with a stipulation specifying the facts that appear without substantial controversy. Upon the trial of the action the facts so specified shall .be deemed established, and the trial conducted accordingly.

Orders may be submitted denying all three motions.
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-Q REPORT OF SYNCORA HOLDINGS LTD.****PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**(Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. §§1350(a) and (b)) 

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. 1350(a) and (b)), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periodended September 30, 2008 of Syncora Holdings Ltd. (the “Company”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

| Dated: November 17, 2008 /s/ Susan B. Comparato SUSAN B. COMPARATO Acting Chief Executive Officer andGeneral Counsel Syncora Holdings Ltd.   Dated: November 17, 2008 /s/ Elizabeth A. Keys ELIZABETH A. KEYS Senior Vice President andChief Financial Officer Syncora Holdings Ltd. 
     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Syncora Holdings Ltd. and will be retained by Syncora Holdings Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 523 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 523

   Expressing support for the designation of National Public Safety 
                             Aviation Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 2019

Mr. Bilirakis submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
           the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing support for the designation of National Public Safety 
                             Aviation Day.

Whereas, for over 65 years, airplanes and helicopters have been an important 
        part of public safety efforts in communities throughout the United 
        States;
Whereas professional public safety aircrews and pilots have flown millions of 
        hours protecting persons and property, often under hazardous and 
        dangerous conditions;
Whereas public safety agencies have long recognized the value of utilizing 
        airborne assets;
Whereas professional public safety aircrews recognize the importance of aviation 
        safety during their missions; and
Whereas July 26 would be an appropriate date to designate as National Public 
        Safety Aviation Day: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of National Public Safety 
        Aviation Day;
            (2) recognizes the men and women who fly public safety 
        missions to protect people and property in the United States; 
        and
            (3) encourages the President to issue a proclamation 
        calling upon the people of the United States to observe 
        National Public Safety Aviation Day with appropriate ceremonies 
        and activities.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Arden Jermaine H. and Another, Children Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Delores Marie S. et al., Appellants; McMahon Services For Children, Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 61]

Orders, Family Court, New York County (Sara E Schechter, J.), entered on or about March 4 and 14, 2005, which, upon findings of permanent neglect, terminated respondents’ parental rights to the subject children and committed the children’s guardianship and custody to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purposes of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The findings of permanent neglect are supported by clear and convincing evidence that despite the agency’s diligent efforts, *370respondent father failed to realistically plan for the children’s future (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a], [c]; *see Matter of Gregory B.,*74 NY2d 77, 89-90 [1989]), and respondent mother missed several visits, was late for others, had poor-quality interaction with the children at certain visits, failed to attend a service plan review, and failed to complete her service plan within the statutorily relevant period (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a], [b]; *see Matter of Pearl M.A.,*13 AD3d 141 [2004]; *cf. Matter of Christian Lee R.,*9 ADSd 275 [2004]). The parents’ challenges to the agency’s diligent efforts in large part raise issues of credibility that were properly resolved by Family Court *(see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 173 [1982]). A preponderance of the evidence supports the findings that it would be in the children’s best interests to be adopted by their respective foster mothers, who are their biological grandmothers, and that it would not be in their best interests to suspend judgment. Such disposition, in these particular circumstances, is not precluded by the fact that the children will live in separate homes *(see Matter of Olimpia M. v Steven M.,*228 AD2d 270 [1996]). We have considered respondents’ other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.