alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Oxy Ex 10.6 10K 12.31.2012






EXHIBIT 10.6


RETENTION PAYMENT AND SEPARATION BENEFITS
ATTACHMENT




		
	a.
	Retention Payment.  Oxy will pay you an amount equal to 2 times your then yearly base salary in one lump sum cash payment at the date that is one year after the new CEO commences employment.




		
	b.
	Separation Benefits. If, prior to December 31, 2014, Oxy terminates you without cause, then, subject to your timely execution of waivers and releases of the type required by Oxy's Notice and Severance Pay Plan, you will receive in addition to your Retention Payment, at your separation date or the time otherwise provided below:




		
	1.
	Separation pay at your then current base salary for 24 months; 




		
	2.
	Your target annual bonus amount for the year of separation; and




		
	3.
	The same medical and other benefits (other than Notice and Severance Pay) as are received by employees terminated pursuant to Oxy's Notice and Severance Pay Plan.




Payments of your separation pay under Paragraph b.1 shall be made monthly beginning the month after separation; provided, however, that to the extent required by Section 409A of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder (“Section 409A”), the payment of certain amounts will be delayed until the seventh month that begins after your separation date. Payment under Paragraph b.2 will be made as soon as practicable after the date you become entitled to the payment under this provision or at the time provided for in any underlying compensation arrangement or plan if required for compliance with Section 409A.  Although not guaranteed by the Company, payments under this attachment are intended to be exempt or compliant with Section 409A, and the attachment will be interpreted accordingly.  Payments under this attachment will be subject to all applicable tax and tax-related items withholding requirements.   In addition, the separation payments to be paid pursuant to this attachment will not exceed the amount permitted under Oxy's Golden Parachute Policy unless such separation payments are approved by a vote of Oxy's stockholders.


		
	c.
	Other Benefits.  The foregoing is not intended to be a comprehensive listing of the benefits to which you may be entitled at the time of your separation, including your rights under any outstanding incentive awards.  In addition, the Executive Compensation and Human Resources Committee may, in its sole discretion, decide to provide additional separation benefits.   















Ret&SepBen - NEO
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 Annual Report of Everyday Assembly  Productions,
Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the period  ending  December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, B.
Stephen Bailey, President 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


/S/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


April 19, 2004


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 the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Employment in Hurricane Storm Surge Flood Zones, Harris County, TX 

Legend 

-- Roads 

Zone 1

Montgomery - Zone2 

- Zone3 

- Zone4 

Fort Bend 

Brazoria 

0 10 20 miles 

35,300,447,451 

Ave rage Tota I 

Area Establishments Monthly Qua rte rl y 

Employment Wages 

Zo ne 1 59 1,055 22,132,248 

Zone 2 98 2,574 48,105,054 

1,571 45,317 859,730,388 

3,252 76,651 1,356,545,770 

4,980 125,597 2,286,513,460 

114,840 2,038,542 

Note: Flood zones represent a 

conservative estimation of areas 

that would experience flooding in 

the event of a hurricane. Zone 1 

is the area that would be flooded 

by a Category I hurricane. A 

Category 11 hurricane would cause 

flooding in Zones 1 and 2. The 

hurricane categories reference the 

Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale. 

Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, Quarterly Census of 

Employment and Wages; 

2020 Third Quarter 

https://www.bis.gov/cew 

Flood Zone Source: Texas 

Department of Public Safety 

~ 

" BLS
#### Anthony Fotiadis et al., Appellants, v City of New York et al., Defendants, and Samuel Field YM and YWHA, Respondent.

[853 NYS2d 591]

After his dismissal from middle school on April 16, 2004, the infant plaintiff disregarded his mother’s instructions to attend the after-school program run by the defendant Samuel Field YM and YWHA (hereinafter the Y) and went directly to a park, where he fell from a swing and fractured his right leg.

A school’s duty to adequately supervise a student is “coextensive” with its physical custody of and control over the student *(Pratt v Robinson,*39 NY2d 554, 560 [1976]; *see Chalen v Glen Cove School Dist.,*29 AD3d 508, 509 [2006]; *Ramo v Serrano,*301 AD2d 640 [2003]; *Bowers v City of New York,*294 AD2d 526 [2002]). The Y established its entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that the infant plaintiff was injured when he was beyond the “orbit” of its authority *(see Pratt v Robinson,*39 NY2d at 560), and that the Y’s failure to notify the infant’s mother that the infant plaintiff was not attending the after-school program was not the proximate cause of his injuries *(see generally Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp.,*51 NY2d 308 [1980]). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the Y’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it *(see Chalen v Glen Cove School Dist.,*29 AD3d 508 [2006]; *Ramo v Serrano,*301 AD2d 640 [2003]).

*500The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Miller, Dillon and Belen, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANA GONZALEZ-CRUZ, AKA Adelfa

Cruz,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 14-71776

Agency No. A200-694-889

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 20, 2016** 

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. 

Ana Gonzalez-Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings

conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

FILED

JAN 27 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

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

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales,

400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review. 

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Gonzalez-Cruz’s motion

to reopen. Gonzalez-Cruz was personally served with the hearing notice for her

July 10, 2012, hearing, and failed to show that exceptional circumstances caused

her to miss her July 10, 2012, hearing, where the declaration accompanying her

motion to reopen asserts that an officer from the Intensive Supervision Appearance

Program informed her that her June 2012 hearing was cancelled. See 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1003.23(b)(4)(ii); Khan v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 825, 828 (9th Cir. 2004) (actual

notice is sufficient to meet due process requirements); 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1)

(defining the term “exceptional circumstances”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 

2 14-71776
Case 3:11-cv-00890-MLC-LHG   Document 66   Filed 02/08/13   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 382
|                                         | 31.1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
|---------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                         |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
|                                         |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|I, Lisa Norman, certify that:           
|1.                                       | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of American Home Alliance Corporation.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
|2.                                       | Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report.
|3.                                       | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results from operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report.                





|By:  /s/Lisa NormanLisa Norman
Chief Executive Officer & Chairman | Date:  July 26, 2013
|----------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------
# Cover

# Total Employment
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 JPG Associates, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jonathan So, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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 result of operations of the Company.  /s/ Jonathan So Jonathan So Title: Principal Executive Officer Principal Financial Officer   May 29, 2008
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
         1

SCHEDULE B
 Payment
    
    DueUp- front, non-refundable license fee, of USD $0
    
    Upon signing of agreementSoftware Royalties for Games of Chance Software 
the royalty shall be equal to Forty-two percent
(42%) of Gross Revenues (Royalty Rate) derived
from the Games of Chance Software, received in
the particular Calculation Period, effective
March 1, 2008.
    
    On the tenth day of each calendar month
following the end of the preceding Calculation
Period.Software Royalties for Multi Player Game
Software the royalty shall be equal to
Seventeen and one half percent (17.5%) of Gross
Revenues (Royalty Rate) derived from the
Multi-Player Game Software, received in the
particular Calculation Period, effective January
1, 2008.
 Internet Media Licensing Limited, Standard EULA
    
    Page 1 of 24th Amendment
    
    Contract No. EULA-010404




---



##### 



1 -Pay)
    Internet Media Licensing Limited
    
    
    
    Ultra Internet
Media S.A. :By: 
Name:
    
    /s/ Kenneth Huang

Kenneth Huang
    
    
    
    By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Thomas Hui

Thomas HuiTitle:
    
    Director
    
    
    
    Title:
    
    Director
 Internet Media Licensing Limited, Standard EULA
    
    Page 2 of 24th Amendment
    
    Contract No. EULA-010404
301 Carnegie Center 3rd Floor Princeton, New Jersey 08540

A Pennsylvania LLP Stephen M. Orlofsky, New Jersey Administrative Partner

www.BlankRome.com 

California • Delaware • Florida • New Jersey • New York • Ohio • Pennsylvania • Texas • Washington, DC • Hong Kong 

135607.00601/50472445v.1

Phone: (609) 750 - 2991

Fax: (609) 897 - 7442

Email: Harbist@BlankRome.com

February 13, 2013

Honorable Susan D. Wigenton

U. S. District Judge

United States District Court, District of New Jersey 

50 Walnut Street 

Newark, NJ 07102 

VIA ELECTRONIC COURT FILING

Re: U.S. ex rel., Bahnsen v. Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp.

Dear Judge Wigenton:

U. S. District Court, Civil Action No. 11-1210

By this letter, Plaintiff/Relator respectfully requests a scheduling order under Fed. R. Civ. 

16(b) so that the Parties may comply with their disclosure and discovery obligations under Rule 

26(A)(1) and 26(F). 

We appreciate the Court’s consideration of this request.

Respectfully submitted,

Nicholas C. Harbist /smh

NICHOLAS C. HARBIST

NCH:smh

cc: All Counsel of Record (via Electronic Court Filing)

Case 2:11-cv-01210-SDW-MCA Document 41 Filed 02/13/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 691
908 A.2d 178

#### IN THE MATTER OF ALCIDES T. ANDRIL, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 025201976).

October 18, 2006.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 06-174, concluding that ALCIDES T. ANDRIL of ELIZABETH, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1976, should be censured for violating *RPC*5.3(a) (failure to adopt and maintain reasonable efforts to ensure that nonlawyer employee conduct is compatible with professional obligations of lawyer), *RPC*5.3(b) (failure to make reasonable efforts to ensure that nonlawyer employee conduct is compatible with professional obligations of lawyer), and *RPC*8.1(a) (knowingly making false statement of material fact to disciplinary authorities), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ALCIDES T. ANDRIL is hereby censured; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in *Rule*1:20-17.
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 on Form 10-Q of Monarch Financial Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and 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 based on their knowledge and belief:

(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 the Company.



|                                                     |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Brad E. Schwartz                                 |  | 
|Brad E. Schwartz,                                    |  | 
|Chief Executive Officer                              |  | 
|                                                     | 
|/s/ Lynette P. Harris.                               |  | 
|Lynette P. Harris                                    |  | 
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |  | 

Date: May 13, 2011
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | • | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|---------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | • | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                combined predecessors of the                Partnership. |
|--------|---------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                           |                                                                                                                                                                         |                                                    |
|--------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:              May 9, 2008 |                                                                                                                                                                    | /s/ JOHN              B.              WALKER  |
|                           | John              B. Walker                                                                                                                                                  |
|                           | Chief                Executive Officer of EV Management LLC, general                partner of EV Energy GP, L.P.,general                partner of EV Energy Partners, L.P. |

----
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.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the Texas Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will convene on Thursday, August 6, 2009 at 1 p.m. and adjourn at 4 p.m. at the Committee Room, State Capitol, 1100 Congress Ave., Austin, Texas. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to plan activities for fiscal year 2010.

                    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office by September 6, 2009. The address is U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles St., Suite 4333, Los Angeles, CA  90012. Persons wishing to e-mail their comments, or to present their comments verbally at the meeting, or who desire additional information should contact Peter Minarik, Regional Director, Western Regional Office, at (213) 894-3437 or 800-877-8339 for individuals who are deaf, hearing impaired, and/or have speech disabilities or by e-mail to                     *pminarik@usccr.gov*.                

Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

                    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Western Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site,                     *http://www.usccr.gov*, or to contact the Western Regional Office at the above e-mail or street address.                

The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

Dated in Washington, DC, July 7, 2009.

Peter Minarik,

Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.

[FR Doc. E9-16356 Filed 7-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
SCWC

- 15

- 0000909

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI  I

________________________________________________________________

STATE OF HAWAI  I, Respondent/Plaintiff

- Appellee,

vs.

RONALD MELVIN BARNES, Petitioner/Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP

- 15

- 0000909; FC

- CR. NO. 12

- 1

- 0057)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack , and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant

- Appellant Ronald Melvin Barnes ’s

application for writ of certiorari filed on November 1 , 2017 , is

hereby accepted

.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that no oral argument will be heard

in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant to

Rule 34(c) of the Hawai  i Rules of Appellate Procedure, move for

retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai  i, December 15, 2017

.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-15-0000909

15-DEC-2017

03:46 PM
Case 2:11-cr-00099-CCC Document 20 Filed 03/29/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 43
Case 2:11-cr-00099-CCC Document 20 Filed 03/29/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 44
Case 2:11-cr-00099-CCC Document 20 Filed 03/29/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 45