alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AEE-2012-12-31-10K-Exhibit 10.17






Exhibit 10.17


2013 BASE SALARY TABLE FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS


The 2013 annual base salaries of the following Named Executive Officers of Ameren Corporation (Ameren), Union Electric Company (UE) and Ameren Illinois Company (AIC) (which officers are employed by Ameren and/or an Ameren subsidiary as of March 1, 2013,  and were determined to the extent applicable by reference to the Ameren Proxy Statement and the UE and AIC Information Statements for the 2013 annual meetings of shareholders and by reference to the definition of “Named Executive Officer” in Item 402(a)(3) of SEC Regulation S-K) are as follows: 


	
				
	Name and Position
	2013 Base Salary
	


	Thomas R. Voss
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer - Ameren 
	$
	1,030,000
	


	Warner L. Baxter
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer - UE
	$
	624,000
	


	Martin J. Lyons, Jr.
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 
     Officer - Ameren, UE and AIC 
	$
	540,000
	


	Steven R. Sullivan
Chairman, President and Chief Executive 
      Officer - Ameren Energy Resources Company, LLC
	$
	485,000
	


	Charles D. Naslund
Executive Vice President - Ameren Services Company 
	$
	462,000
	


	Adam C. Heflin
Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer - UE
	$
	445,000
	


	Gregory L. Nelson
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
     Secretary - Ameren, UE and AIC
	$
	440,000
	


	Daniel F. Cole
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer - Ameren Services Company 
	$
	415,000
	


	Richard J. Mark
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer - AIC
	$
	412,000
Case 2:11-cr-00470-SDW Document 81 Filed 11/20/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 1007
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 137 (Monday, July 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35226-35227]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17194]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6703]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Georgia O'Keeffe: Abstraction''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 
of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of 
April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Georgia O'Keeffe: Abstraction,'' imported 
from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Whitney Museum 
of American Art, New York,

[[Page 35227]]

NY, from on or about September 17, 2009, until on or about January 17, 
2010; at the Phillips Collection, Washington, DC, from on or about 
February 6 until on or about May 9, 2010; at the Georgia O'Keeffe 
Museum, Santa Fe, NM, from on about May 28 until on or about September 
12, 2010; and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these 
Determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal Register.

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

    Dated: July 14, 2009.
C. Miller Crouch,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-17194 Filed 7-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Hon. Dennis M. Cavanaugh

V. Crim. No. 11—459

BLAS ERNERS ESPINAL-CABRERA,: ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE

a/k/a “Hermano”

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 Mary E. Toscano, Special Assistant

U. S. Attorney), and defendant BLAS ERNERS ESPINAL-CABRERA (by

Patrick J. Brackley), for an order granting a continuance of the

proceedings in the above-captioned matter, 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 3161(c) (1), and as the defendant has

consented to such a continuance, 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) The.parties request an opportunity for sufficient

time to review the evidence and engage in plea negotiations,

which would render any subsequent trial of this matter

unnecessary;

Case 2:11-cr-00459-SDW Document 15 Filed 02/01/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 32
(2) Taking into account the exercise of diligence,

therefore, the facts of this case require that defense counsel be

permitted a reasonable amount of additional time to review the

evidence with the defendant, and should plea negotiations fail,

time for effective trial preparation in this matter,

(3) As a result of the foregoing, pursuant to Title 18,

United States Code, Section 3161(h) (7), the ends of justice

served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of

the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS, therefore, on this 31day of January, 2012,

ORDERED that this action be, and hereby is, continued

for a period of 60 days from January 29, 2012 to March 29, 2012;

and it is further

ORDERED that the period from January 29, 2012 through

March 29, 2012 shall be excludable in computing time under the

Speedy Trial Act of 1974.

H N. DENNIS M. CAV AUGH

United States District Judge

—2—

Case 2:11-cr-00459-SDW Document 15 Filed 02/01/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 33
C)

Ow

rt

cnCD

0

fri

00

CD

(DO.

CD

Oct

“fri

1<

CD

(Dh

CoOLou’

H

0

Cow(DO

C)

C”

çt0

CD

CD

CD

CD

CD

Cl)

zcm

Case 2:11-cr-00459-SDW Document 15 Filed 02/01/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 34
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20007 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PABLO GUTIERREZ-CARILLO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-128-1

-------------------- September 14, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Pablo Gutierrez-Carillo (“Gutierrez-Carillo”) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Gutierrez-Carillo has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
          THE RESGISTRANT'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND
          IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
          STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1

<S>                                                 <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             YEAR
<CASH>                                                   82887
<SECURITIES>                                           5282201
<RECEIVABLES>                                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       5365088
<PP&E>                                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        28499851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   159736
<BONDS>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                            28340115
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          28499851
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       2630147
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           458847
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        348325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        1718205
<INCOME-TAX>                                           1718205
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    1718205
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           1718205
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                0


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Johnnie Ray CARPENTER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-30134.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 12, 2012.

Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Eugene P. Cicardo, Jr., Alexandria, LA, Gregory N. Wampler, Lemoine & Wam-pler, Pineville, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

After consenting to a jury trial before a magistrate judge, Johnnie Ray Carpenter was convicted for obstructing a deputy United States marshal, and other duly authorized persons, in serving or attempting to serve and execute a legal and judicial writ and process of a court of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1501. He appealed to the district court, which affirmed. *United States v. Carpenter,*No. 09-CR-00271, 2012 WL 292480 (W.D.La. 31 Jan. 2012).

At the time of the offense, Carpenter was police chief of Winnfield, Louisiana. He presents three claims: (1) the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction for knowingly and willfully obstructing a federal officer in executing an arrest warrant; (2) Carpenter’s actions in his official capacity as police chief were justified; and (3) the district court erred in allowing testimonial evidence of Carpenter’s criminal history. Essentially for the reasons stated in the district court’s well-reasoned and comprehensive opinion, the judgment is

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Subjex Corporation does hereby certify that:

(a) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Subjex Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(b) information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Subjex Corporation



|                     |                                     |                     | 
|-------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------- | 
|Date: April 13, 2009 | By:                                 | /s/ ANDREW D. HYDER | 
|                     | Andrew D. Hyder                     |                    
|                     | President & Chief Executive Officer |
Exhibit 10.14.6

 



 

Date:                      September 17, 2012

 

To:                         Management Metric Based Bonus (MBB) Participants

 

From:                    Jim Lejeal

 

Regarding:           Q3 & Q4 FY13 MBB Structure and Goal

 

 

To align MBB participants with the sales team’s bookings objectives for the 2H period, the 2H MBB program will be awarded and conditioned as follows:

 

The 2H MBB will be paid according to the Company’s performance against the Total Product Bookings assigned to the sales team as quota for the 2nd half of the year.

 

For example, if the company performs at 110% of quota assignment for total product bookings — an MBB participant will earn 110% of their award for this period.

 

Rally will pay the MBB quarterly under the following conditions:

 

·                  A Q3 MBB payment will be paid to participants at 100% provided that the company exceeds 85% of new product bookings quota amount for Q3.

·                  The Q4 MBB payment will be paid to participants according to the company’s performance against the Total Product Bookings quota assignment amount for the second 6 months of the fiscal year.

·                  However, The Company must achieve 90% of the 2H new product bookings for the Q4 portion of the MBB to be paid.

·                  A total payment cap will apply and is set at 125%.

 

Target amounts, once set, will be communicated in the “Monday Team Meeting”.

 

True Up:

 

A “true-up” will take place on the Q4 payment.

 

·                  For example, if the Company performs to 115% of product bookings for 2H 2013 and 100% was paid for Q3 the additional 15% due on 2H will be paid with the Q4 payment.

 

Q3 Payment Recoverability:

 

Note that in the unlikely event the 90% of 2H FY13 bookings is not attained the Q3 bonus will be deemed earned based on achieving the 85% “new bookings” milestone for Q3.

 

Anticipated Payout Date:

 

It is anticipated Rally will

 

·                  pay the Q3 MBB between 30 Nov 12 and 15 Dec 12 and

·                  pay the Q4 MBB between 28 Feb 13 and 15 Mar 13
WILLIS & YOUNG, P. C.

921 Bergen Avenue, Suite 525

Jersey City, New Jersey 07306

(201) 659—2090

Attorney for Defendant SALVADOR PUELLO-RODRIGUEZ

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

P1 a in tiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

vs.

SALVADOR PUELLO-RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant (s)

THIS matter having been opened to

Esq., of Willis & Young, P.C. attorney

CR. NO. 11-345 (WHW)

ORDER TO PERMIT TRAVEL

the Court by Peter R. Willis,

for Defendant Salvador Puello—

Rodriguez, for an Order Permitting the Defendant to travel to the

Dominican Republic, and the United States Attorney, appearing and for

good cause shown, ‘1-

IT IS on this Qi(/ day of March, 2012;

ORDERED that the Application is hereby GRANTED; and further

ORDERED that the Defendant, Salvador Puello-Rodriguez, is

permitted to travel to the Dominican Republic for the purpose of

visiting his ill mother, from April 4, 2012 until April 18, 2012.

5,

Case 2:11-cr-00345-WHW Document 4 Filed 03/21/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 28
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHUNBIAO WU,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General,

Respondent.

No. 23-1201

Agency No.

A200-274-844

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted June 6, 2024

Pasadena, California

Before: CLIFTON and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and RODRIGUEZ, District 

Judge.

**

Petitioner Chunbiao Wu, a citizen of China, petitions for review of the 

decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal of the denial 

of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable Xavier Rodriguez, United States District Judge for the 

Western District of Texas, sitting by designation.

FILED

JUL 30 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 23-1201

under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

Even accepting Wu’s testimony regarding events he experienced as true, 

Kumar v. Holder, 728 F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir. 2013), the record does not compel 

the conclusion that he met his burden to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future 

persecution, see Duran-Rodriguez v. Barr, 918 F.3d 1025, 1028 (9th Cir. 2019).

The fact that Wu was able to leave China without incident suggests a lack of police 

interest, given that all departing passengers are checked for arrest warrants. That

his parents remain in China unharmed despite their practice of Falun Gong 

suggests the same. See Pagayon v. Holder, 675 F.3d 1182, 1190-91 (9th Cir. 2011) 

(per curiam). The BIA decision emphasized the disparity between Wu’s testimony 

about what his wife had told him and the letter from her that Wu produced. It was 

not unreasonable for the agency to conclude that the letter’s claims about the 

police’s intentions were unpersuasive because they went well beyond what Wu had 

testified to his wife having previously said. Having found the letter unpersuasive, 

the agency was entitled to interpret Wu’s testimony as failing to demonstrate that 

the police were actively seeking him for “collaborating against the Chinese 

government.” 

Because Wu failed to meet his burden of establishing eligibility for asylum, 

he necessarily fails to meet the higher burden of proof required for withholding of 

removal. See Ramirez-Munoz v. Lynch, 816 F.3d 1226, 1230 (9th Cir. 2016).

PETITION DENIED.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5235

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to ensure that the receipts 

and disbursements of the Social Security trust funds are not included 

in a unified Federal budget. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 6, 2004

Mr. MOORE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

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

committee concerned 

A BILL

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to ensure that 

the receipts and disbursements of the Social Security 

trust funds are not included in a unified Federal budget.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST 

4 FUNDS FROM THE UNIFIED FEDERAL BUDG5 ET. 

6 Section 201 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

7 401) is amended by adding at the end the following new 

8 subsection: 
2

•HR 5235 IH 

1 ‘‘(o)(1) The receipts and disbursements of the Fed2 eral Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the 

3 Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund (including taxes 

4 upon which any such receipts are based)—

5 ‘‘(A) shall not be included in the Federal budg6 et baseline for any fiscal year, and 

7 ‘‘(B) shall not be counted as new budget au8 thority, outlays, receipts, or deficit or surplus for 

9 purposes of—

10 ‘‘(i) offsetting any tax decrease, or 

11 ‘‘(ii) offsetting any spending increase. 

12 ‘‘(2) Any official statement issued by the Office of 

13 Management and Budget or by the Congressional Budget 

14 Office of surplus or deficit totals of the budget of the 

15 United States Government as submitted by the President 

16 or of the surplus or deficit totals of the congressional 

17 budget, and any description of, or reference to, such totals 

18 in any official publication or material issued by either of 

19 such Offices, shall exclude the receipts and disbursements 

20 totals of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance 

21 Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust 

22 Fund (including taxes upon which any such receipts are 

23 based).’’. 
3

•HR 5235 IH 

1 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

2 The amendment made by this Act shall apply to fiscal 

3 years beginning on or after October 1, 2005.

Æ
**Michigan Supreme Court** 

**Lansing, Michigan**

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 7, 2015 

# Order

April 7 , 2015

150591 ( 6 5 )

INNOVATION VENTURES, L.L.C., d/b/a

LIVING ESSENTIALS

, Plaintiff

- Appell ant

,

v

LIQUID MANUFACTURING, L.L.C., K & L

DEVELOPMENT OF MICHIGAN, L.L.C., LXR

BIOTECH L.L.C., ETERNAL ENERGY, L.L.C.,

ANDREW KRAUSE, and PETER PAISLEY

, Defendant s

- Appell ee s

. SC: 150591

COA: 315519

Oakland CC: 2012

- 124554

- CZ

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce

to participate as amicus curiae and for leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED.

The amicus brief submitted on March 27, 2015, is accepted for filing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Crim. No. 11-364 (FSH)

v. : O R D E R

LACHEZAR LAZAROV :

Defendant. :

This matter having come before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge filed in this matter, which was submitted as a result of this Court having

referred this cause to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of conducting a plea proceeding under

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; and the defendant having consented to the Magistrate Judge conducting the

guilty plea proceeding; and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as

the transcript of the proceedings on June 1, 2011 and there being no objection to the Report and

Recommendation timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b); and the Court finding the Report and

Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; and the Court hereby finding that

the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted and the defendant’s guilty plea

accepted,

IT IS ON THIS 24 day of June, 2011, th

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is

approved and adopted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s guilty plea is accepted and a judgment

of guilt to Counts One and Two of the Information shall be entered. 

 s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cr-00364-SDW Document 31 Filed 06/24/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 50