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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5141 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the alternative 

minimum tax treatment of incentive stock options, thereby changing 

the taxable event from the exercise of the stock option to the sale 

of stock. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2004 

Ms. LOFGREN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 

the alternative minimum tax treatment of incentive stock 

options, thereby changing the taxable event from the 

exercise of the stock option to the sale of stock. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX 

4 TREATMENT OF INCENTIVE STOCK OPTIONS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 56 of the 

6 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to adjustments 

7 applicable to individuals) is amended by striking para8 graph (3). 
2 

•HR 5141 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to incentive stock 

3 options exercised in 2000 or thereafter regardless of when 

4 such options were granted. 

5 (c) WAIVER OF LIMITATIONS.—If refund or credit of 

6 any overpayment of tax resulting from the application of 

7 the amendment made by subsection (a) is prevented at any 

8 time before the close of the 1-year period beginning on 

9 the date of the enactment of this Act by the operation 

10 of any law or rule of law (including res judicata), such 

11 refund or credit may nevertheless be made or allowed if 

12 claim therefor is filed before the close of such period. 

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5097 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5097

  To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to prevent conflicts of 
interest by establishing post-employment limitations on bank examiners-
                   in-charge, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 15, 2004

  Mr. Gutierrez (for himself and Mrs. Kelly) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to prevent conflicts of 
interest by establishing post-employment limitations on bank examiners-
                   in-charge, 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 ``Close the Bank Examiner Revolving 
Door Act ''.

SEC. 2. POST-EMPLOYMENT LIMITATIONS ON BANK EXAMINERS-IN-CHARGE.

    Section 10 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1821) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(g) Post-Employment Limitations on Bank Examiners-in-Charge.--
            ``(1) In general.--In the case of any person who--
                    ``(A) ceases to be an officer or employee of a 
                Federal banking agency; and
                    ``(B) at any time during the 3-year period ending 
                on the date such person ceases to be an officer or 
                employee of such agency, was the chief examiner of, or 
                had supervisory authority over, any depository 
                institution,
        such person may not hold any office, position, or employment 
        (including a position which causes such person to be treated as 
        an institution-affiliated party) at any such depository 
        institution during the 1-year period beginning on such date.
            ``(2) Penalty for noncompliance.--
                    ``(A) In general.--Any person who violates 
                paragraph (1) shall forfeit such person's retirement 
                and other benefits under title 5, United States Code.
                    ``(B) Notice.--If the head of any Federal banking 
                agency determines that a violation of paragraph (1) has 
                occurred, the head of such agency shall notify the 
                Director of the Office of Personnel Management of such 
                violation.''.
                                 <all>
```
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Mel Herzog, state and attest that:

     (1) I am the CEO of Energy Producers, Inc. (the "issuer").

     (2) Accompanying this certification is the Form 10-KSB for the period ended
December 31, 2001, a periodic report (the "periodic report") filed by
the issuer with the Securities  Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) or
15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  (the  "Exchange  Act"),  which
contains financial statements.

     (3) I hereby  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 my
knowledge:

     o the periodic report  containing the financial  statements  fully complies
     with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and

     o the information  contained in the periodic repor fairly presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     issuer for the periods presented therein.


/s/Mel Herzog
-------------------
Mel Herzong
Date:  August 23, 2002


<PAGE>
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 1 of 15 PageID: 144
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 2 of 15 PageID: 145
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 3 of 15 PageID: 146
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 4 of 15 PageID: 147
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 5 of 15 PageID: 148
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 6 of 15 PageID: 149
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 7 of 15 PageID: 150
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 8 of 15 PageID: 151
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 9 of 15 PageID: 152
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 10 of 15 PageID: 153
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 11 of 15 PageID: 154
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 12 of 15 PageID: 155
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 13 of 15 PageID: 156
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 14 of 15 PageID: 157
Case 3:11-cv-03183-FLW-TJB Document 4-14 Filed 06/03/11 Page 15 of 15 PageID: 158
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Homeland EnergySolutions, LLC (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Jeffrey S. Grober, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.               The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.               The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/  Jeffrey S. Grober   |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | Jeffrey  S. Grober,      |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |
|   | Dated:                   | November 12,  2010 |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16618]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Chapter 1

[Docket FAR 2009-0002, Sequence 6]


Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 
2005-35; Small Entity Compliance Guide

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Small Entity Compliance Guide.

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

SUMMARY: This document is issued under the joint authority of the 
Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of General Services and the 
Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 
This Small Entity Compliance Guide has been prepared in accordance with 
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
of 1996. It consists of a summary of the rule appearing in Federal 
Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2005-35 which amends the FAR.
    Interested parties may obtain further information regarding these 
rules by referring to FAC 2005-35 which precedes this document. These 
documents are also available via the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hada Flowers, FAR Secretariat, (202) 
208-7282. For clarification of content, contact the analyst whose name 
appears in the table below.

                       Rule Listed in FAC 2005-35
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Subject                  FAR case            Analyst
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revocation of Executive Order            2009-015  Woodson
 13202.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A summary for the FAR rule follows. For the 
actual revisions and/or amendments to this FAR case, refer to FAR case 
2009-015.
    FAC 2005-35 amends the FAR as specified below:

Revocation of Executive Order 13202 (FAR Case 2009-015)

    In accordance with Executive Order 13502--Use of Project Labor 
Agreements for Federal Construction Projects, this final rule amends 
FAR 36.202(d) to delete references to the revoked Executive Order 
13202. The E.O. prohibited executive departments and agencies from 
requiring or prohibiting Federal Government contractors and 
subcontractors' entrance into project labor agreements. This rule 
requires no action on the part of contracting officers.

    Dated: July 9, 2009.
Al Matera,
Director, Office of Acquisition Policy.
 [FR Doc. E9-16618 Filed 7-10-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
Case 3:11-cv-02565-AET-DEA Document 59 Filed 03/30/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 573
Case 3:11-cv-02565-AET-DEA Document 59 Filed 03/30/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 574
Case 3:11-cv-02565-AET-DEA Document 59 Filed 03/30/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 575
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Criminal Action No.: I I-353(JLL)

ORDER

LINARES, District Judge,

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion to file a reply to the

Government’s opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss and for discovery, and to supplement

the motion record. Because this case is set for an omnibus hearing on March 26, 2012 at 10:00

a.m,, the Court finds that allowing Defendant to submit a reply may result in the undue delay of

this hearing. Accordingly, Defendant will be given the opportunity to duly traverse on the record

at the upcoming hearing.

Further, as Defendant’s motion to supplement to the record is unopposed, Defendant’s

application will be granted.

IT IS on this 21st day of March, 2012,

ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for leave to file a reply is denied; and it is further

ORDERED that the Defendant’s motion to supplement the record with additional

exhibits is granted.

SO ORDERED.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

BAHADIR YAHSI,

L. LINARES

DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cr-00353-JLL Document 55 Filed 03/21/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 489
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 Hon. Susan D. Wigenton
v. : Crim. No. 11-470 (SDW)

ANDREW AUERNHEIMER

CONTINUANCE ORDER

This matter having come before the Court on the joint
application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the
District of New Jersey (by Zach Intrater, Assistant U.S.
Attorney), and defendant Andrew Auernheimer (by Tor Ekeland,
Esq.) for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in
the above-captioned matter to pursue plea negotiations, and the
defendant being aware that he has the right to have the matter
brought to trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance
before a judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of
the United States Code, Section 3161l(c) (1), and as the defendant
has consented to such a continuance, and one continuance having
been previously granted, and for good and sufficient cause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should
be continued for the following reasons:

1. Defense counsel has recently been retained, and
desires additional time to resolve the matter through a plea
agreement or to prepare for trial;

2. Plea negotiations are currently in progress, and

both the United States and the defendant desire additional time


to consider a plea agreement, which would render trial of this
matter unnecessary;

3. The grant of a continuance will likely conserve
judicial resources;

4. Pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code,
Section 3161(h)(7), the ends of justice served by granting the

continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial.
IT IS, therefore, on this 5 day of January, 2012,

ORDERED that this action be, and it hereby is,
continued from the date of this Order through and including June
1, 2012; and it is further

ORDERED that a trial schedule shall be set by the

Court; and it is further


ORDERED that the period from the date of this Order
through and including June 1, 2012, shall be excludable in
computing time under the Speedy Trial Act o 74, pursuant to

Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161 (f)A7).

Form and entry
consented to:

Rica

Zach Intrater
Assistant U.S. Attorney

Te cht 0

Tor Ekeland
_Counsel for defendant Andrew Auernheimer
EX-10.5



 Exhibit 10.5 
 2012 Cash Bonus Awards 
  

					
	 Executive Officer
	  	2012 Cash Bonus*	 
	 Douglas C. Bryant

President and Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	242,292	  
	 Robert J. Bujarski

Senior Vice President, Business Development and General Counsel
	  	$	78,279	  
	 Mark Smits

Senior Vice President, Commercial Operations, North America
	  	$	70,931	  
	 Randall J. Steward

Chief Financial Officer
	  	$	73,932	  
	 Timothy Stenzel, M.D./Ph.D.

Chief Scientific Officer
	  	$	75,251	  
	 John D. Tamerius, Ph.D.

Senior Vice President, Clinical/Regulatory
	  	$	70,803	  

  

	*	To the extent the executive officer elected to participate in the Company’s 2012 Employee Deferred Bonus Compensation Program (the “Program”), the
participating executive officer may have received 50% or 100% of the cash value of his or her bonus plus an additional premium on such deferred amount in the form or restricted stock units per the terms and conditions of the Program.
AO 121 (6/901 

TO: 

Register of Copyrights REPORT ON THE 

Copyright Office FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN 

Library of Congress ACTION OR APPEAL 

Washington, D.C. 20559 REGARDING A COPYRIGHT 

In compliance with the provisions of 17 U.S.c. 508, you are hereby advised that a court action or appeal has been filed on the 

following copyright(s): 

X ACTION o APPEAL 

COURT NAME AND LOCATION 

US DISTRICT COURT 

50 WALNUT STREET 

NEWARK, NJ 07101 

DOCKET NO. 

11-3614 (FSH) 

DATE FILED 

6/24/2011 

PLAINTIFF 

PATRICK COLLLl',/S, INC. 

DEFENDANT 

JOHN DOES 1-26 

COPYRIGHT 

REGISTRATIO:"l NO. TITLE OF WORK AUTHOR OF WORK 

1 SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT B 

2 

3 

4 

5 

In the above-entitled case, the following copyright(s) have been included: 

DATE INCLUDED INCLUDED BY 

o Amendment o Answer o Cross Bill o Other Pleading 

COPYRIGHT 

REGISTRATION NO. TITLE OF WORK AUTHOR OF WORK 

1 

2 

3 . 

In the above-entitled case, a final decision was rendered on the date entered below. A copy ofthe order orjudgment together 

with the written opinion, if any, of the court is attached. 

COpy ATTACHED WRITTEN OPINION ATTACHED DATE RENDERED 

o Order o Judgment DYes o No 

CLERK DATE 

WILLIAM T. WALSH 6/24/2011 

1) Upon initiation of action, 2) Upon filing of document adding copyright(s), 3) Upon 

mail copy to Register of Copyrights mail copy to Register of Copyrights mail copy to 

DISTRIBUTION: 

4) In the event of an appeal, forward copy to Appellate Court 5) Case File Copy 

Case 2:11-cv-03614-FSH -PS Document 4 Filed 06/24/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 30
.. ~ .......:.' ... "" .


" " ... ·,··u: ··CAT·" ". '~>T,!,:•. sIl... ARP ! 

'.' .'",. 	. , ••••••.l.~J.~1 . " 

:. 

. lWe ... , ___________________.... , · ....·iiijO, ..'... • "'lIJ-OiJ!!oooo~,!tt""'!"': -­.....~-...

. 'l!We:'Ot·Wa~··VlIBInSA, 

.~~IIQQ1P.h~IQ~------------II.~--,j-al,~.~~~__~~_~.;.;... ai 

., V_.~P"'r' 16ft 

Da"o1'~~~~t.. 9.,.2(11; 

.;A.~t .... ,tt_........---------,---"...· ----.,•.-­ .. 1\,tI,Q~ K·Beoch.lnc., dba QIerry·H~'I( PI~: 

~fiiP.~:"(.l~Il~, ~~~I'QTI~~ 

WodtlDNhl fot::lllm V. 


lift :tJtIh1ld iii. 


~pyrlgt¢.~a~~ , q II .. • • .3 


~opy~:a.I~amt .K-Ik«.b..Inc...dba dietl)' BoxlCt P\QtuI'Cl' 


·.Rights .hd·.Pennl.l~ni 

. .~,..J~II~~ ,~~b, jnc. 


Name: JIilff ,Sl,,,,der . 


·~P.l j;~~,!1DfD 

..0\'411..... : 	'9®] MIlSaIl A\'e.. Uuit.D 

.Ch!I~wortl\. CA 91311 Unltl:l<l S~'IIles 

,. Certification. 

HIMel ..IcI\'Sn)'<H:r 

Date: AP~! za. 2011 

'I 

I EXHIBITB i

I i

.. J 

Case 2:11-cv-03614-FSH -PS Document 4 Filed 06/24/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 31
~~.. ~~'ift. :~:"'SW1geI'6'2: 

~':~~ 

Cp....pondent 

~~pOlUflifu Name: ,K:-Btecl1, .lnO. 

:l"!'llIne:~ Sity.der 

.·.EmeRt j~bm:Jh.t;l(lrn 

Ad~: 11601 ~Ave., UnitS 

C~rth,CM)lJllllnllelJ St.'\l~ 

Mail teJtJflcate 

-llcecJl. Jac. 

:J:Ift'Snyib' 

9601 MI!$I)/l Ave. 

UnitES 


Clooswonb. CA 91311 Vnit(.'<i SI.:II~'l: 

Case 2:11-cv-03614-FSH -PS Document 4 Filed 06/24/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 32
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6466

DAVID WAYNE EWART , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. MIKE SLAGLE, Superintendent , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville

. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. ( 1:18

- cv - 00183

- FDW )

Submitted : July 1 8 , 2019 Decided: July 23, 2019

Before WILKINSON , AGEE , and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. David Wayne Ewart , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: David Wayne Ewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order di smissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a sub stantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’ s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstra te both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ewart has not mad e the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.
DISMISSED
PRK-EX10.9(b)-2012.12.31-10K






Exhibit 10.9(b)


Schedule identifying Non-Employee Directors 
of Park National Corporation covered by form 
of Split-Dollar Agreement,  made and 
  entered into effective as of December 28, 2007  


The following directors of Park National Corporation (“Park”) are covered by Split-Dollar Agreements (the “Split-Dollar Agreements”) as identified below, which Split-Dollar Agreements are identical to the form of Split-Dollar Agreement, made and entered into effective as of December 28, 2007, filed as Exhibit 10.2(a) to Park's Current Report on Form 8-K dated and filed on January 2, 2008 (File No. 1-13006):


	
					
	Name of Director


	 
	Subsidiary of Park which is a Party to
Split-Dollar Agreement


	 
	Date of Split-
Dollar Agreement



	Maureen H. Buchwald
	 
	The Park National Bank (as successor by merger to The First-Knox National Bank of Mount Vernon)
	 
	December 28, 2007

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	F. William Englefield IV
	 
	The Park National Bank
	 
	December 28, 2007

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	John J. O'Neill
	 
	The Park National Bank
	 
	December 28, 2007

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Rick R. Taylor
	 
	The Park National Bank (as successor by merger to The Richland Trust Company)
	 
	December 28, 2007

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Leon Zazworsky
	 
	The Park National Bank
	 
	December 28, 2007