alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.39



 EXHIBIT 10.39 
 FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE 
 PROFIT PARTICIPATION PLAN OF 

MOODY’S CORPORATION 
 The Profit
Participation Plan of Moody’s Corporation is hereby amended as follows, effective as of January 1, 2013: 
 1. A new Section 2(m) is added to read as
follows: 
 “Threshold” means an Increase in Pro-forma Earnings Per Share equal to the greater of (i) ten percent (10%) or (ii)
two percent (2%) in excess of targeted Earnings Per Share percentage growth for the Plan Year. 
 2. Section 4.3 is amended to read as follows: 

In the event the Increase in Pro-forma Earnings Per Share for any Plan Year equals or exceeds the Threshold, the Company shall make Profit Sharing
Contributions for such Plan Year. In order to receive a Profit Sharing Contribution for a Plan Year, a Participant must be actively employed by the Company or an Affiliate on December 31 of the applicable Plan Year and be classified by the Company
or the Affiliate as a full-time or part-time employee as of such date. Such Profit Sharing Contributions and the allocation thereof shall be determined in accordance with the following table: 

 

					
	 Increase in Pro-forma Earnings

Per Share for the Plan Year
	  	 Profit Sharing Contribution (Percentage

of Eligible Employee’s Compensation
 for the Plan Year)
	  	 
	Threshold	  	0.4%	  	
	3% above Threshold	  	0.9%	  	
	5.5% above Threshold	  	1.2%	  	
	8% above Threshold	  	1.6%	  	
	10% or more above Threshold	  	1.8%	  	

 If the Increase in Pro-forma Earnings Per Share for any Plan Year results in a percentage between any two
percentages shown on the above table, the Company shall compute the Profit Sharing Contribution amounts by mathematical interpolation and rounding the right-hand column upward to the one-tenth of one percent of Compensation, subject to the first
sentence of this Section 4.3. 
 Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall a Profit Sharing Contribution be credited to the
Account of a Participant if applicable law (including, without limitation, the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act) prohibits the Participant from being credited with such Profit Sharing Contribution. 

  

			
	 	 	MOODY’S 2012 10-K
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 Regal Rock, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in
the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

   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.


Date:  January 14, 2008


/s/ Eric Wildstein
-------------------------------------------
Eric Wildstein, President and C.E.O.
(Principal Executive Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Warren, Appellant.

[851 NYS2d 880]

*570The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel (see *Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, P.J., Mastro, Santucci and Dillon, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6325

WILLIAM DOUGLAS DAWSON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ASS. WARDEN DENIS BUSH, Individually and in their official 

capacity; WARDEN LARRY CARTLEDGE, Individually and in their 

official capacity; ASS. WARDEN FLORENCE MAUNEY, Individually 

and in their official capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. 

(4:13-cv-02236-DCN)

Submitted: July 23, 2015 Decided: July 27, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Douglas Dawson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. James Victor 

McDade, DOYLE, O’ROURKE, TATE & MCDADE, PA, Anderson, South 

Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

William Douglas Dawson, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

judgment accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Douglas v. 

Bush, No. 4:13-cv-02236-DCN (D.S.C. Feb. 20, 2015). We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4977 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4977

   To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect the reasonable 
   expectation of privacy of users of e-mail, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 22, 2004

    Mr. Nadler (for himself, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Kucinich, and Mrs. 
   Maloney) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect the reasonable 
   expectation of privacy of users of e-mail, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``E-mail Privacy Protection Act of 
2004''.

SEC. 2. INTERCEPTION OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS DURING TRANSMISSION.

    Section 2510(12) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``and includes any temporary, intermediate storage of that 
communication incidental to the electronic transmission thereof,'' 
after ``commerce,''.

SEC. 3. IMPROPER ACQUISITION OF CONTENTS OF STORED ELECTRONIC 
              COMMUNICATIONS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS.

    Section 2701 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(d) Improper Acquisition by Service Provider.--Whoever, being a 
provider of an electronic communication service, or an agent or 
employee of such a provider, acquires or uses the contents of a stored 
electronic communication of which that provider, agent, or employee is 
not an intended recipient other than for the purposes of providing that 
electronic communication service, shall be fined under this title or 
imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### REISS et al. v. BRITISH GENERAL INS. CO.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Oct. 19, 1949.

*611Halperin, Natanson & Scholer, New York City, for plaintiff.

Powers, Kaplan & Berger, New York City, for defendant.

RYAN, District Judge.

Defendant moves to vacate plaintiffs’ notice to take the deposition of Samuel Berger, described in the notice as “one of the attorneys for the defendant.” The notice specified the matter concerning which examination of Berger is sought, to wit, “as to any knowledge he may have of the facts alleged in the answer of the defendant.”

The action is brought to recover for loss of certain jewelry upon a policy of insurance issued by defendant insuring plaintiffs against all risk of loss of specific jewelry owned by plaintiffs.

Defendant’s answer consists substantially of a denial of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to loss, and of an affirmative defense pleading that in an examination conducted by defendant of plaintiffs, prior to the commencement of the action, pursuant to a provision in the policy, plaintiffs made certain false and fraudulent statements in an attempt to deceive and defraud defendant.

It appears that after proof of the loss was submitted to defendant, it retained a firm of attorneys to investigate the claim and that as part of such investigation plaintiffs were to be examined under oath. Under the provision of the policy, plaintiffs were required to submit to such examination. The same attorneys who conducted the investigation were later retained by defendant to represent and defend it in this action. Berger, a member of the firm, apparently had charge of the investigation and examination.

It is urged by defendant that the information sought under this notice is part of the “work product” of its attorneys and therefore privileged, and that “plaintiffs are attempting to inquire into material collected by an adverse party’s counsel in the course of a situation that may result in litigation, and which in this case has actually resulted in the pending suit.”

A stenographic record of the examination was furnished plaintiffs by defendant, but this does not operate to deprive plaintiffs of their right to examine Berger.

It is reasonable to assume that at least some of Berger’s services were not those rendered or expected to be performed by an attorney, but were rather work ordinarily done by an insurance adjuster and investigator. Such acts are not protected by privilege and are not embraced in an attorney-client relationship; nor, can they be said to be the “work product” of an attorney or part of his preparation for defense of the action. This is particularly so when they are done before legal action is commenced, threatened or contemplated.

The court will not at this time attempt to limit or fix the scope of the examination; this can best be accomplished by rulings on objections to specific questions put to the witness Berger during his examination.

Motion to vacate the notice of deposition is denied.
Case 3:11-cv-00890-MLC-LHG   Document 45   Filed 10/19/12   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 286
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Helix Wind, Corp. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q/ A for the period ended June 30, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this
Certification is an exhibit (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the
Company does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350) and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b)  promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
to my knowledge:





(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.





Date:
November 18,  2009


/ s/ Kevin
      ClaudioKevin
      ClaudioChief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 11

                            U.S. MEDICAL GROUP, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON
                          AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARES

                 For the years ended December 31, 2000 and 1999

                                                          2000         1999
                                                       -----------  -----------

Shares outstanding at beginning of period              13,575,380   13,575,380*

Weighted average of common shares issued during the
period                                                          -            -
                                                       -----------  -----------
Weighted average of common shares outstanding during
the period                                             13,575,380   13,575,380

Stock options and warrants outstanding                          -       58,285

Shares used in computing earnings per common share     13,575,380   13,633,665

Earnings per common share ($776,109/13,575,380)        $      .06
                                                       ===========
Earnings per common share ($233.475/13,633,665)                     $      .02
                                                                    ===========

*restated to give effect to merger
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statements of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in Part II, Item 7. of this Form 10-KSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          13,261
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,261
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,261
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,266
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,000
<OTHER-SE>                                         995
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,261
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                42,750
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (42,750)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (42,750)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (42,750)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit
      32





Certification
      Pursuant to


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350,


as
      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Medialink Worldwide Incorporated (the
      "Company"), hereby certify to such officers’ knowledge, that the Company's
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report")
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
      the
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of the Company.




Dated:
      April 2, 2007


/s/
                Laurence MoskowitzName:
                Laurence MoskowitzTitle:
                Chief Executive Officer /s/
                Kenneth TorosianName:
                Kenneth TorosianTitle:
                Chief Financial Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002.
# table127_q14.4_naics
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4987 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4987

     To provide for priority funding of water, waste disposal, and 
wastewater facility loans and grants and community facilities loans and 
  grants for the communities in Burlington and Camden counties in New 
     Jersey, affected by the flood which occurred on July 12, 2004.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 22, 2004

Mr. Saxton (for himself, Mr. LoBiondo, and Mr. Andrews) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide for priority funding of water, waste disposal, and 
wastewater facility loans and grants and community facilities loans and 
  grants for the communities in Burlington and Camden counties in New 
     Jersey, affected by the flood which occurred on July 12, 2004.

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

SECTION 1. PRIORITY FUNDING OF WATER, WASTE DISPOSAL, AND WASTEWATER 
              FACILITY LOANS AND GRANTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES LOANS 
              AND GRANTS FOR THE COMMUNITIES IN BURLINGTON AND CAMDEN 
              COUNTIES IN NEW JERSEY, AFFECTED BY THE FLOOD WHICH 
              OCCURRED ON JULY 12, 2004.

    (a) Consideration of Applications.--In considering an application 
for a loan or grant under paragraph (1), (2) or (19) of section 306(a) 
of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act for a project 
involving a water, waste disposal, or wastewater facility or an 
essential community facility, from an entity located in a community in 
Burlington or Camden county, New Jersey, that has been affected by a 
major disaster designated by the President under the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act that occurred on July 12, 
2004--
            (1) the project is deemed to be in a rural area; and
            (2) if the project is for a water system, the Secretary of 
        Agriculture is deemed to have determined that the project meets 
        the requirements of paragraph (9) of such section.
    (b) Grant Rates.--If the Secretary of Agriculture approves an 
application referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection for a 
grant, the amount of the grant shall be--
            (1) in the case of a grant under section 306(a)(2) of the 
        Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, 75 percent of the 
        development cost of the project involved; or
            (2) in the case of a grant under section 306(a)(19) of such 
        Act, not less than 35 percent of the cost of developing the 
        facility involved.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
 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 US Uranium Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James D. Davidson,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 condition and result of operations of the Company.
 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of December
12, 2008.
  /s/
      James D. DavidsonJames
      D. DavidsonChief
      Executive Officer and
                                                  Chief
      Financial Officer
 
 A signed
original of this written statement, 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 US
Uranium Inc., and will be retained by US Uranium Inc., and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


4.2Amount of Normal Retirement
Benefit ...is amended by deleting Section 4.2(a) in its entirety and substituting a new Section 4.2(a) in lieu thereof
as follows:


 


		(a)	Determination of Normal Retirement Benefit - Each Participant shall be entitled to receive
a monthly retirement benefit commencing on his Normal Retirement Date provided he has incurred a Separation from Service, or Deferred
Retirement Date, (unless he elects otherwise in accordance with Section 9.3), in an amount equal to one-twelfth (1/12) of (1) or
(2) below:



 


		(1)	Group A Participants- Means those Participants who entered this Plan prior to January 1,
2009. - All such Participants shall receive a Normal Retirement Benefit equal to the greater of (i) or (ii) below:



 


		(i)	Thirty-five percent (35%) of such Participant’s Final Average Compensation, but subject
to a maximum benefit of $80,000 per calendar year. However, the maximum annual benefit cap of $80,000 per calendar year shall not
apply to John Mendez. Or,



 


		(ii)	Any Participant with Final Average Compensation in excess of $175,000 at Normal Retirement
Age, who has also completed 30 or more Years of Service, shall be entitled to receive the maximum annual benefit of $80,000 per
calendar year, in monthly installments of $6,666.67 provided such Participant has incurred a separation from Service.



 


		(2)	Group B Participants- Means any Participant who entered this Plan after December 31, 2008.
All such Group B Participants shall receive a Normal Retirement Benefit equal to:



			



 


One and one-half percent (1.5%)
of such Participant’s Final Average Compensation multiplied by his number of Years of Benefit Service, subject
to a maximum Normal Retirement Benefit of thirty-five percent (35%) of a Participant’s Final Average Compensation,
and further subject to a maximum benefit of $80,000 per calendar year.
Exhibit
31.2




CERTIFICATION




I,
Kenneth Torosian, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Amendment #1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Medialink
Worldwide Incorporated;





2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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 report;





Dated:
April 30, 2009





/s/ Kenneth TorosianName:
      Kenneth TorosianTitle:
      Chief Financial Officer