alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.50






EXHIBIT 10.50




Tower Group, Inc.

2004 Long Term Equity Compensation Plan




Notice of Performance Shares Award




     You (the “Grantee”) have been granted Performance Shares, which provide the opportunity to
earn shares of common stock of Tower Group, Inc. (the “Company”), par value $0.01 per share
(“Shares”), upon attainment of performance goals (“Performance Shares” or the “Award”). The Award
is granted pursuant to the Tower Group, Inc. 2004 Long Term Equity Compensation Plan (collectively,
the “Plan”) and is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Notice of Performance
Shares Award and the Performance Shares Award Agreement (collectively, the “Agreement”).



	 	 	 
	Name of Grantee:
	 	 
	Target Number of Performance Shares:
	 	 
	Maximum Number of Performance Shares:

	 	200% of Target Number of Performance Shares
	Grant Date:

	 	March 13, 2008
	Performance Period:

	 	January 1, 2008 — December 31, 2010
	Performance Goal:

	 	Total shareholder return through the
Performance Period relative to that of the
companies in the SNL P&C Insurance Total
Shareholder Return Index
	Period of Restriction:

	 	January 1, 2008 — December 31, 2010





FURTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD ARE SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE PLAN. THESE
PERFORMANCE SHARES ARE SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE AS PROVIDED IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE PLAN.



All terms, provisions and conditions applicable to the Award set forth in the Plan and not set
forth herein are hereby incorporated by reference herein. To the extent any provision hereof is
inconsistent with the Plan, the Plan will govern. The Participant hereby acknowledges receipt of a
copy of the Agreement and a copy of the Plan and agrees to be bound by all the terms and provisions
hereof and thereof.



By your signature and the signature of the Company’s representative below, you and the Company
agree that the Award evidenced hereby is granted under and governed by the terms and conditions of
the Plan (a copy of which you hereby acknowledge having received) and the Agreement, which is
attached to and made a part of this document.



You further acknowledge that the Award evidenced by the Agreement will become subject to and
governed by the terms and conditions of the Plan, as amended and restated May 15, 2008, if such
amended and restated version of the Plan is approved at the Company’s 2008 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders, and you hereby consent to the Award being governed by the terms and conditions of the
Plan, as amended and restated May 15, 2008.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Grantee: 	Tower Group, Inc.:

 	 
	 	 	By:  	 	 
	 	 	 	Title:
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 Commerce Economic Development Administration
 AGENCY: Economic Development Administration, Commerce.
 ACTION: Notice and opportunity for public comment.
 SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act 1974, as amended, the Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of these firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
[7/27/2017 through 8/14/2017]
Firm name
Firm address
Date accepted for
                             investigation
Product(s)Wasatch Photonics, Inc
1305 North 1000 West, Suite 120, Logan, UT 84321
8/3/2017
The firm manufactures holographic gratings, spectroscopic instruments, and optical coherence tomography solutions.Electro-Hydraulic Automation, Inc
1620 Blairs Ferry Road NE., Cedar Rapids, IA 52402
8/7/2017
The firm manufactures hydraulic and pneumatic power units.
 Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms. Irette Patterson, Program Analyst.


[FR Doc. 2017-17616 Filed 8-25-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
#### Gerald N. PELLEGRINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ANALOG DEVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 2008-1091.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 27, 2007.

Gerald N. Pellegrini, pro se.

ORDER

Appellant having paid the initial filing fee, it is

ORDERED that the order of dismissal and the mandate be, and the same hereby are, VACATED and RECALLED, and the notice of appeal is REINSTATED.

The Appellant’s Brief is due on or before January 17, 2008.
#### IN RE: WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC., FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT (FLSA) AND WAGE AND HOUR LITIGATION.

MDL No. 2322.

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

Feb. 3, 2012.

Before JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman, KATHRYN H. VRATIL, BARBARA S. JONES, PAUL G. BARBADORO, and MARJORIE O. RENDELL, Judges of the Panel.

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, common defendant Wireless Lifestyle, Inc. (Wireless Lifestyle) moves for centralization of the four actions 1 listed on Schedule A in the Western District of Missouri (or, in the alternative, the Northern District of California). Responding plaintiffs in two actions, Northern District of California *Martinez*and *Fraizier,*oppose centralization.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we conclude that *1383Section 1407 centralization would not serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses or further the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. Although all four actions involve allegations concerning Wireless Lifestyle’s compensation practices,2 those allegations differ significantly from action to action. The Northern District of California *Martinez*action, for example, involves unique allegations involving compensation owed to terminated employees, while the Central District of California *Coleman*involves unique allegations that plaintiffs therein were not provided with any seating in the stores in which they worked. While there does appear to be some overlap among the actions, the differences among them appear to predominate, and thus centralization would likely hinder the just and efficient conduct of the litigation, considered as a whole. Available alternatives to centralization may minimize whatever possibilities may arise of duplicative discovery or inconsistent pretrial rulings. *See, e.g., In re Eli Lilly and Co. (Cephalexin Monohydrate) Patent Litig.,*446 F.Supp. 242, 244 (J.P.M.L.1978); *see also Manual for Complex Litigation, Fourth,*§ 20.14 (2004).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for centralization of these actions is denied.

SCHEDULE A

MDL No. 2322 — IN RE: WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC., FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT (FLSA) AND WAGE AND HOUR LITIGATION

> *Central District of California*

> *Teausha Coleman v. Wireless Lifestyle, Inc., et al.,*C.A. No. 5:11-01727

> *Northern District of California*

> *Yasmin Martinez v. Wireless Lifestyle, Inc.,*C.A. No. 3:11-05132

> *Kevin Fraizier, et al. v. Wireless Lifestyle, Inc.,*C.A. No. 3:11-05192

> *Western District of Missouri*

> *Chase White, et al. v. Pasha Distribution Corporation,*C.A. No. 4:11-00975

*

 Judge W. Royal Furgeson, Jr., and Judge Charles R. Breyer took no part in the disposition of this matter.

1

. Although the Section 1407 motion, as filed, also encompassed a Northern District of Illinois action, that action has since been terminated.

2

. Wireless Lifestyle is a retail provider of cell phones, phone rate plans, and related services.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 6/3/96 TENTH CIRCUIT
ANTHONY RAY JENKINS, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. 95-3102 ) (D.C. No. 95-3090-DES) T. KEITH WILSON, Judge, ) (D. Kansas) ) Defendant-Appellee. )

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before ANDERSON, BARRETTand LOGAN , Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the court on plaintiff Anthony Ray Jenkins’ motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal without payment of costs or fees. To succeed on his motion plaintiff must show both the financial inability to pay the required filing fees and the existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the issues raised on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Coppedge v. United States , 369 U.S. 438 (1962); Ragan v. Cox , 305 F.2d 58 (10th Cir. 1962).2

Plaintiff seeks to appeal the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the Seward County (Kansas) judge who revoked his appeal bond. He requests damages as well as his own release from prison. He further asserts that the state courts lack jurisdiction over all other criminal proceedings against him. He asserts general due process, double jeopardy and equal protection violations stemming from those state proceedings. Plaintiff raises additional issues in his brief that appear to challenge the legality of criminal proceedings against him, including an alleged improper interlocutoryappeal by the state and a double jeopardy violation. He seeks to relitigate issues previously decided against him in other cases he filed. The allegations are legally frivolous and constitute another attempt by this plaintiff to obtain habeas corpus relief in a § 1983 action. We conclude that plaintiff can make no rational argument on the law or facts in support of the issues raised on appeal. Therefore, the motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees is denied. The appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. Entered for the Court James K. Logan Circuit Judge
**SEC. File Nos.	033-32785**

**811-05888**

 

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

Washington, D.C. 20549

____________________

 

**FORM N-1A**

 

Registration Statement

Under

the Securities Act of 1933

Post-Effective Amendment No. 44

 

and

 

Registration Statement

Under

the Investment Company Act of 1940

Amendment No. 47

____________________

 

**SMALLCAP WORLD FUND, INC.**

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

333 South Hope Street

Los Angeles, California 90071-1406

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

 

Registrant's telephone number, including areacode:

(213) 486-9200

____________________

 

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

***SMALLCAP World Fund, Inc.***

*333 South Hope Street*

*Los Angeles, California 90071-1406*

*(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 December 1, 2014, pursuant to paragraph (b) of Rule 485.
No. 1160.

#### Phillips *v.*Securities & Exchange Commission et al.

June 3, 1946.

*Julien Cornell*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath, Roger S. Foster*and *Arnold R. Ginsburg*for the Securities & Exchange Commission, and *William L. Ransom*for the United Corporation, respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF ACTING
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER I, Timothy C. Lincoln, certify that: 1.
I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Le@P Technology, Inc.  2.
Based
on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;  3.
Based
on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other financial information
included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the of the small business issuer as
of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;  4.
The
registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and            procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15r and 15d-18e) for the small business issuer and have;  a)
designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
annual report is being prepared;  b)
evaluated
the  effectiveness  of the small  business  issuers  disclosure  controls and
 procedures as the end of                      period covered by of this annual report
based on such evaluation; and  c)
disclosed
in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
The
small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit
committee of small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):  a)
all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could
adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the small business issuers
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and  b)
any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the small business issuers internal controls.  Date:  March 23, 2005  /s/ Timothy C. Lincoln
Timothy C.
LincolnActing Principal Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
32.1


Certification
By Michael C. Jennings Pursuant To


18
U.S.C. Section 1350,


As
Adopted Pursuant To


Section
906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Frontier Oil Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael C.
Jennings, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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.





/s/ Michael C.
Jennings


Michael
C. Jennings


President
and Chief Executive Officer





February
25, 2010
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment
Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated January
28, 1983, as amended and supplemented to date, Post-Effective Amendment Number
3 to Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated October 10, 1983,
Post-Effective Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement Number 2-97149 on
Form S-8 dated September 30, 1985, Post Effective Amendment Number 3 to
Registration Statement Number 2-76480 on Form S-8 dated April 22, 1985, Post-
Effective Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-70806 on Form
S-8 dated May 20, 1981, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2, 1-A and 1-B to
Registration Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-4 dated March 26, 1986, as
supplemented and amended to date, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2-A and 2-B
to Registration Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-8 to Form S-4 dated June
1, 1987, Registration Statement Numbers 33-35762 and 33-35763 on Form S-8
dated July 6, 1990, Registration Statement Number 33-52295 on Form S-8 dated
February 16, 1994, Registration Statement Number 33-58323 on Form S-8 dated
March 31, 1995, and Registration Statement Number 333-03753 on Form S-3 dated
May 15, 1996, as amended to date, of our report dated December 12, 1997 included
in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Whittaker Corporation for the year ended
October 31, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, as
amended, included in this Form 10-K/A. We also consent to the reference to our
firm under the caption "Experts" in the aforementioned Registration Statements
insofar as that reference relates to our report for the year ended October 31,
1997.
 
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
Los Angeles, California
April 7, 1998
exv4w53






Exhibit 4.53




Supplemental Loan Agreement




	 	 	 
	Borrower (Party A):

	 	Zastron Electronic (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.

	Address:

	 	Gu Su Industrial Estate, Xixiang, Baoan, Shenzhen
	Postal Code:

	 	518126 
	 
	 	 
	Lender (Party B):

	 	Zastron Precision-Tech Limited

	Address:

	 	Cricket Square, Hutchins Drive, P.O. Box 2681, Grand Cayman
	 

	 	KY1 -1111, Cayman Islands






Whereas,





	(1)	 	A Loan Agreement (“Former Loan Agreement”) was made
and entered into by and between Party A and Party B on 30th March, 2004, wherein, Party A
borrowed USD18,660,000 and the loan term of one year, from 31st March 2004 to
30th March 2005;
	 
	(2)	 	Afterwards, several Supplemental Loan Agreements were entered into by and between both Party
A and Party B upon consensus through consultation to defer the repayment deadline. In
accordance with the Supplemental Loan Agreement signed on 5th September 2007, the
maturity date for loan was 30th March 2008.
	 
	(3)	 	Upon consultation, both Party A and Party B enter into the Agreement in the purpose of
extending the repayment deadline in the Former Loan Agreement by one year, in order to
jointly abide by and implement.






			
	Article 1	 	Loan Term





Party A and Party B now consent to re-extend the Loan Term in Article 3 under the Former Loan
Agreement by one year, and shall start from 31st March 2008 to 30th March
2009.





			
	Article 2	 	Validity of the Aforesaid Agreement




The Loan Term in the Former Loan Agreement is modified, and all terms and conditions therein
continue to be effective.





 - 1 - 









 









			
	Article 3	 	Coming into Effect of the Agreement




This Agreement comes into effect upon the signing by Statutory Representative (Principal) or
Authorized Agent designated by Party A and Party B hereof and the affixation of respective official
seal.





			
	Article 4	 	This Agreement shall be made in triplicate and automatically
become null and void upon the repayment of the principal by Party A.






			
	Article 5	 	The Agreement shall comply with the Regulations for Foreign
Exchange Control of the People’s Republic of China.





Party A (Official Seal): Zastron Electronic (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.

Statutory Representative or Authorized Agent (Signature):




(Seal)

(Signature)

3rd April 2008




Party B (Official Seal): Zastron Precision-Tech Limited

Representative (Member of Board) or Authorized Agent (Signature):




	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	For and on behalf of	 	 
	 

	 	Zastron Precision-Tech Limited	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Signature)
 

          Authorized
Signature (illegible)
	 	 






3rd April 2008





 - 2 -
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 154 (Friday, August 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37626-37627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17070]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Tuesday, August 
15, 2017 at 1:00 p.m., in the Auditorium (L-002) at the Commission's 
headquarters building, to hear oral argument in an appeal from an 
initial decision of an administrative law judge by respondents Frank H. 
Chiappone, Andrew G. Guzzetti, William F. Lex, Thomas E. Livingston, 
Brian T. Mayer, and Philip S. Rabinovich, formerly registered 
representatives associated with former broker-dealer McGinn, Smith & 
Co., Inc.
    On February 25, 2015, the ALJ found that Chiappone, Lex, Livington, 
Mayer, and Rabinovich violated antifraud provisions of the federal 
securities laws by recommending that customers purchase securities 
without conducting a reasonable investigation into the offerings as 
well as provisions of the securities laws prohibiting unregistered 
offers and sales of securities. The ALJ barred or suspended these 
respondents from certain associations in the securities industry and 
ordered them to pay third-tier civil money penalties, to pay 
disgorgement of commissions received for their sales in violation of 
the antifraud provisions plus prejudgment interest, and to cease and 
desist from further violations of the securities laws. The ALJ found 
that Guzzetti failed reasonably to supervise the other respondents, 
ordered him to pay a third-tier civil money penalty, and suspended him 
from association in certain capacities in the securities industry.

[[Page 37627]]

    Respondents appealed the ALJ's findings of liability and the 
sanctions imposed to the Commission. The issues likely to be considered 
at oral argument include, among other things, whether the findings of 
liability should be sustained, and what sanctions, if any, are 
appropriate in the public interest, as well as respondents' arguments 
that the proceeding violated various Constitutional, statutory, and 
regulatory requirements.
    For further information, please contact Brent J. Fields from the 
Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: August 8, 2017.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17070 Filed 8-9-17; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
No. 1068.

#### Eastman *v.*United States.

May 27, 1946.

*Louis B. Sher*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath, Robert S. Erdahl*and *Sheldon E. Bernstein*for the United States.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.