alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 23, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-60546 Summary Calendar

BARRACK JUMA OCHONDO, Petitioner,

versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A72 426 558

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Barrack Juma Ochondo, a citizen and native of Kenya, petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (BIA) order affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, cancellation of removal, and withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture and final order of removal. When, as here, the BIA adopts the IJ’s decision, we review the IJ’s decision. See Mikhael v. INS , 115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 1997).No. 06-60546 -2- Ochondo argues that the IJ and BIA erred by denying his request for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2)(a)(i)(I) because the evidence showed that he was abused by his United States citizen former spouse. For the first time in this court, he asserts that the IJ’s denial of his request for cancellation of removal violated his due process rights. We do not have jurisdiction to consider Ochondo’s challenge to the IJ’s and BIA’s determination that Ochondo did not suffer extreme cruelty. See Wilmore v. Gonzales , 455 F.3d 524, 526-28 (5th Cir. 2006). Because Ochondo did not raise his due process claim before the BIA, we do not have jurisdiction to consider the due process claim. See Goonsuwan v. Ashcroft , 252 F.3d 383, 389- 90 (5th Cir. 2001). In any event, relief from removal under discretionary waiver is not entitled to due process protection. Nguyen v. District Director, Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 400 F.3d 255, 259 (5th Cir. 2005). Ochondo’s challenges to the denial of his request for cancellation of removal are dismissed. Ochondo argues that the IJ erred by denying his request for withholding of removal on the grounds that he was HIV positive, that people with HIV are discriminated against in Kenya, and that sufficient medical care is not available. Because Ochondo did not show that he faced persecution from the Kenyan government or a group or groups that the Kenyan government was unwilling orNo. 06-60546 -3- unable to control, the IJ’s denial of Ochondo’s request for withholding of removal was supported by substantial evidence.
See Adebisi v. INS , 952 F.2d 910, 913-14 (5th Cir. 1992). Ochondo’s challenge to the denial of his request for withholding of removal is denied. PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED IN PART, DENIED IN PART.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

FAINA KLIGER,

Appellant,

v.

SETH E. SCHNEIDERMAN, P.A.,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1105

[October 28, 2021]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Terri-Ann Miller, Judge; L.T. Case No. COSO19-14110.

Faina Kliger, North Miami Beach, pro se.

Seth E. Schneiderman of Seth E. Schneiderman, P.A., Hollywood, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CONNER, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
SEC File Nos.	333-67455

**811-09105**

 

 

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

	Washington, D.C. 20549

 

		

 

	**FORMN-1A**

** **

	Registration Statement

	Under

	the Securities Act of 1933

	Post-Effective Amendment No. 26

 

	and

 

	Registration Statement

	Under

	the Investment Company Act of 1940

	Amendment No. 27

		

 

	**NEWWORLD FUND, INC.**

**	**(ExactName of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

	333 South Hope Street

	Los Angeles, California 90071-1447

	(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

 

	Registrant's telephone number, includingarea code:

	(213) 486-9200

		

 

	***Michael W. Stockton, Secretary***

***	New World Fund, Inc.***

	*333 South Hope Street*

*	Los Angeles, California 90071-1447*

*	(Name and Address of Agent for Service)*

*	*	

 

	Copies to:

	***Mark D. Perlow***

*	**K&L Gates LLP***

*Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200*

*San Francisco, California 94111-5994*

*	(Counsel for the Registrant)*

*	*	

	

	Approximate date of proposed public offering:

It is proposed that this filing become effectiveon August 29, 2014, pursuant to paragraph (b) of Rule 485.
MEHC 12.31.12 EX 10.17








EXHIBIT 10.17


SUMMARY OF KEY TERMS OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS
 WITH MIDAMERICAN ENERGY HOLDINGS COMPANY
 NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS


MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company's ("MEHC") continuing named executive officers each receive an annual salary and participate in health insurance and other benefit plans on the same basis as other employees, as well as certain other compensation and benefit plans described in MEHC's Annual Report on Form 10-K. 


The named executive officers are also eligible to receive a cash incentive award under MEHC's Performance Incentive Plan ("PIP"). The PIP provides for a discretionary annual cash award that is determined on a subjective basis and paid in December. In addition to the PIP, the named executive officers are eligible to receive discretionary cash performance awards periodically during the year to reward the accomplishment of significant non-recurring tasks or projects. Mr. Gregory E. Abel has not been granted discretionary cash performance awards in the past five years. Messrs. Patrick J. Goodman and Douglas L. Anderson and Ms. Maureen E. Sammon are participants in MEHC's Long-Term Incentive Partnership Plan ("LTIP"). Mr. Abel does not participate in the LTIP. A copy of the LTIP is attached as Exhibit 10.9 to the MEHC Annual Report on Form 10-K. Mr. Abel is a participant in MEHC's Incremental Profit Sharing Plan ("IPSP"). Messrs. Goodman and Anderson and Ms. Sammon do not participate in the IPSP. A copy of Mr. Abel's IPSP is attached as Exhibit 10.2 to the MEHC Annual Report on Form 10-K. 


Base salary for continuing named executive officers for MEHC's fiscal year ending December 31, 2013, is shown in the following table:


	
				
	Name and Title
	Base Salary

	Gregory E. Abel
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	$
	1,000,000
	


	Patrick J. Goodman
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	$
	410,000
	


	Douglas L. Anderson
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
	$
	330,000
	


	Maureen E. Sammon
Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer
	$
	245,000
	







Mr. Abel is a director of MEHC, but does not receive additional compensation for his service as a director other than what he receives as an employee of MEHC. The other members of the MEHC board of directors do not receive compensation for their service as directors.
# 2019 pop adjustment effect
# time- and incentive-based pay
EX-10.9



 EXHIBIT 10.9 
 DESCRIPTION OF HORIZON BANCORP 
 EXECUTIVE OFFICER BONUS PLAN

 The Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of Horizon Bancorp (the
“Company”) adopted an Executive Officer Bonus Plan (the “Plan”) in 2003 after consultations with a nationally recognized executive compensation consulting firm. The Plan permits executive officers to earn as a bonus a percentage
of their salary based on the achievement of corporate and individual goals in the relevant year. Participants in the Plan are not eligible to participate in the Company’s annual discretionary bonus plan. To receive a bonus under the Plan, the
executive officer must be employed by the Company or one of its subsidiaries on the date the annual bonus payment is made and must not be subject to a performance warning or suspension. The Committee and/or the Company’s Chief Executive Officer
may adjust and amend the Plan at any time in their sole discretion. 
 At the beginning of each year, the Committee establishes
the minimum earnings target the Company must achieve before any bonuses will be paid out under the Plan for that year. The Committee also approves a target bonus matrix for each executive officer to be used to calculate the executive officer’s
bonus (if any) for the year (assuming that the minimum earnings target has been met). The matrix for each executive officer specifies the performance measures applicable to the executive officer, the targets for each performance measure and the
weight to be assigned to each performance measure in calculating the bonus if the specified target levels are achieved. 
 Each
executive officer has the opportunity to earn a bonus under the Plan of up to a specified percentage of his base salary. Each of the executive officer has as a performance goal the achievement of a specified level of corporate net income for the
year. The matrix for each of the executive officers also specifies from three to five other performance measures, each of which is dependent upon the executive officer’s areas of responsibilities and varies from year to year to reflect changes
in the primary responsibilities of the office that the executive officer holds. 
 The percentage of base salary that may be
earned and the weighting of performance goals are disclosed each year in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section of the Company’s Proxy Statement. The amounts of the bonuses paid each year under the Plan are reported in the
“Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table included in the Company’s Proxy Statement. 

  
 121
EXHIBIT
32.2




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report of Infinite Group, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, James Witzel, 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, as amended;
  and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
November 12, 2009





/s/
      James WitzelJames
      WitzelChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)




A signed
original of this certification 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.
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 135 (Thursday, July 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 34589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16917]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[LLWY-957400-09-L14200000-BJ0000]

Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey, Wyoming

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of filing of plats of survey, Wyoming.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is scheduled to file the 
plat of survey of the lands described below thirty (30) calendar days 
from the date of this publication in the BLM Wyoming State Office, 
Cheyenne, Wyoming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management, 5353 
Yellowstone Road, P.O. Box 1828, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82003.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This survey was executed at the request of 
the Bureau of Land Management and is necessary for the management of 
these lands. The lands surveyed are:
    The plat and field notes representing the dependent resurvey of a 
portion of the south boundary and subdivisional lines, and the 
subdivision of section 33, Township 34 North, Range 110 West, of the 
Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 726, was accepted July 9, 
2009.
    Copies of the preceding described plat and field notes are 
available to the public at a cost of $1.10 per page.

    Dated: July 10, 2009.
John P. Lee,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of Support Services.
[FR Doc. E9-16917 Filed 7-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
```
V 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5371

For the relief of David Adekoya. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2004

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of David Adekoya.

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

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL OF, DE4 NIAL OF ADMISSION TO, DAVID ADEKOYA. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding sections 212(a) 

6 and 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, David 

7 Adekoya may not be removed from the United States, or 

8 denied admission to the United States, by reason of any 

9 act of his that is a ground for removal or denial of admis10 sion and is reflected in the records of the Department of 

11 Homeland Security, or the Visa Office of the Department 

12 of State, on the date of the enactment of this Act. 
2

•HR 5371 IH 

1 (b) RESCISSION OF OUTSTANDING ORDER OF RE2 MOVAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall re3 scind any outstanding order of removal, or any finding of 

4 inadmissibility or deportability, that has been entered 

5 against David Adekoya by reason of any act described in 

6 subsection (a). 

7 (c) ESTABLISHMENT OF GOOD MORAL CHAR8 ACTER.—Notwithstanding section 101(f) of the Immigra9 tion and Nationality Act, any act described in subsection 

10 (a) may not be considered in determining whether David 

11 Adekoya is, or during any period has been, a person of 

12 good moral character for purposes of the Immigration and 

13 Nationality Act.

Æ
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm


We consent
to the reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the
Prospectus and to the use of our report dated March 13, 2013, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-186379) of Smart
Trust, Zacks Diversified Equity & Corporate Bond Trust, Series 2.


 





	 	/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP









Chicago, Illinois


March 13, 2013
EXHIBIT 1

Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 1068
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 2 of 9 PageID: 1069
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 3 of 9 PageID: 1070
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 4 of 9 PageID: 1071
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 5 of 9 PageID: 1072
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 6 of 9 PageID: 1073
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 7 of 9 PageID: 1074
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 8 of 9 PageID: 1075
Case 3:11-cv-03788-FLW-LHG Document 95-2 Filed 10/05/12 Page 9 of 9 PageID: 1076
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 5 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, August 11, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia Robb at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Area 5 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, August 11, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. Central Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Patricia Robb. For more information please contact Ms. Robb at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: July 16, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E9-17483 Filed 7-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 10.6

CURIS

May 10, 2002

Changgeng Qian

10 Riverview Circle

Wayland, MA 01778

Dear Chang,

I am pleased to inform you of your promotion
to Director. The terms of your promotion are outlined below:

Position: Director, Pharmacology

Effective Date: May 6, 2002

Rate of Pay: $10,833.33 per month to be reviewed as part of our performance review program.

Stock Options: You will
be granted an option to purchase additional shares of common stock of the Company. The number of shares will be determined by the Board of Directors and will be granted, subject to Board approval, at its next regularly schedule meeting. The stock
option vests over four years with 25% vesting on the first anniversary of the date of grant. The stock option then vests at 6.25% per quarter over the remainder of the vesting period. Vesting of stock options is contingent upon your continued
employment at Curis. The exercise price of the option will be established by the Board of Directors.

It should be understood by you that
your employment at Curis, Inc. is at all times on at at will basis, which means that it is not guaranteed for any specific period of time and may be terminated by you or by Curis at any time, with or without notice. The terms of your
employment will be interpreted in accordance with and governed by laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

If the terms of your
promotion are acceptable, please indicate your acceptance by signing both copies of this letter. Please return one copy to Holly Benke, Human Resources.

Sincerely,



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/ LEE RUBIN                       
|Lee Rubin, Ph.D.                    
|Sr. Vice President, Research and CSO

Agreed and accepted:



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ CHANGGENG QIAN
|Changgeng Qian    

Date: May 21, 2002
#### Owen J. Peterson et al., Appellants, v Commerce Street Properties, Inc., Respondent.

[854 NYS2d 494]

In 1974 the plaintiffs purchased stock from, and entered into a lease with, the defendant corporation to operate an auto parts store in the mini-mall that constituted the corporation’s sole asset. The original bylaws of the corporation provided that stock ownership and a lease were inseparable, and that they could only be conveyed as a unit. A “memorandum of agreement” entered into by the parties provided that the plaintiffs had the qualified right to sell their shares and terminate the lease upon assignment to a suitable new tenant/shareholder. In 1995 the defendant’s bylaws were amended, inter alia, to sever the connection between the leases in the mini-mall and stock ownership in the corporation, provide for the unencumbered sale of the stocks, and increase the number of shares in the corporation.

*837In 1998 the plaintiffs defaulted on their lease by failing to pay rent. The plaintiffs entered into a contract for the sale of their stocks and assignment of their lease to a third party. At about the same time, the plaintiffs filed for bankruptcy, and thereafter the bankruptcy court terminated the plaintiffs’ lease. The defendant then sold new shares to the plaintiffs’ prospective buyer, and entered into a lease with it for the store previously rented by the plaintiffs. The defendant applied the proceeds of the sale to satisfy the plaintiffs’ outstanding debt and costs associated with their default, and distributed the remaining proceeds evenly to all of the shareholders, including the plaintiffs.

The complaint alleges that the defendant’s sale of stocks and issuance of a lease for the store previously rented by the plaintiffs, in effect, deprived the plaintiffs of the value of their shares. The defendant counterclaimed for the plaintiffs’ arrearages and thereafter moved for summary judgment on the complaint and on the issue of liability on its counterclaim. The Supreme Court granted the defendant’s motion, and the plaintiffs appeal.

The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). The plaintiffs relinquished their claim to proceeds from the sale of the lease by defaulting on the lease, and the defendant’s actions did not otherwise violate the memorandum of agreement, the defendant’s bylaws, its fiduciary duty, or the Cooperative Corporations Law. In response, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]).

Since this is an action, in part, for a declaratory judgment, the matter must be remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for the entry, after an inquest on damages on the defendant’s counterclaim, of a judgment, inter alia, declaring that the subject contract is not null and void. Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.