alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Description of Director Compensation Arrangements



 Exhibit 10.20 
 Mobitv, Inc. 
 Director Compensation 

(upon effectiveness of initial public offering) 
 Board Fees 
 Non-employee members of the Board are eligible to receive the following
annual retainer fees for Board service (paid quarterly): 
  

							
	 Board of Directors Member
	  	 	$22,500	  	  	
			
	 Audit Committee Chair
	  	 	$20,000	  	  	
			
	 Compensation Committee Chair
	  	 	$9,000	  	  	
			
	 Nominating and Governance Committee Chair
	  	 	$5,000	  	  	
			
	 Audit Committee member (non-Chair)
	  	 	$5,000	  	  	
			
	 Compensation Committee member (non-Chair)
	  	 	$3,750	  	  	
			
	 Nom. & Gov. Committee member (non-Chair)
	  	 	$2,250	  	  	

 Eligible directors may elect to receive stock options in lieu of the retainer fee, on an annual basis, based on the
Black-Scholes value on date of grant. 
 Long Term Incentive Equity Awards 

Non-employee members of the Board are eligible to receive the following stock option awards for Board service: 

 

							
	Initial award1 	  	$	150,000	3 	 	
			
	Annual award2 	  	$	100,000	3 	 	
	  
 1vests annually over three years
  
 2Cliff vest one-year from grant date (annual meeting of stockholders)

 
 3Grant
date fair value of option award on date of award


 Reimbursement of Expenses 
 The Company will reimburse Board members for necessary and reasonable expenses incurred in the course and scope of performing services.
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.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10338 North Georgia Bank, Watkinsville, Georgia (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of North Georgia Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

Effective September 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

Dated: September 6, 2017.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-19136 Filed 9-8-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
Amendment to Deferred Compensation Agreement - Warren P. Levy



 Exhibit 10.19 
 December 19, 2008 
 Dr. Warren P. Levy 
 President & Chief Executive Officer 
 Unigene Laboratories, Inc.

 81 Fulton Street 
 Boonton, NJ 07005 
 Re:    Amendment to Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Agreement 
 Dear Warren, 
 Reference is made to the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Agreement (the “Deferred
Compensation Agreement”) dated February 1, 2006, by and between you and Unigene Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”). 
 By
signing this letter agreement, you and the Company, intending to be legally bound, hereby amend the Deferred Compensation Agreement as follows, effective December 31, 2008: 
 The paragraph of the Deferred Compensation Agreement entitled “Acceleration of Annual Credits” is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety, to read as follows: 
 “Acceleration of Annual Credits. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event of
your death, disability, or in the event that there occurs a “change in the ownership or effective control” of the Company or a “change in the ownership of a substantial portion of the assets” of the Company, each within the
meaning ascribed to such events by Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and the applicable guidance issued thereunder (any such event, a “Change in Control”), all remaining Annual Credits will be accelerated and immediately
credited to your Account.” 
 In addition, the paragraph of the Deferred Compensation Agreement entitled
“Distributions” is hereby amended to add the following sentence to the end thereof: 
 “Notwithstanding anything to the
contrary herein, each distribution to which you are entitled under this Agreement as a result of your death or disability shall be paid to you (or to your estate, if applicable) as soon as practicable, but in no event later than 90 days following
such death or disability, or the first anniversary thereof, as applicable.” 
 [Signature page follows] 







 Except as amended hereby, the Deferred Compensation Agreement is affirmed and ratified in all respects.

  

			
	Sincerely,
	
	UNIGENE LABORATORIES, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Robert F. Hendrickson

		 	 Robert F. Hendrickson, Chair of the Compensation Committee
 For the Board of Directors


 ACCEPTED AND AGREED this 19th day of December, 2008: 
  

			
	 /s/ Dr. Warren P. Levy

	Dr. Warren P. Levy
* 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. 01-31222

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALLEN NICHOLAS TASSIN,

DefendantAppellant.

---------------------------------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 01-CR-70-ALL-N

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

May 20, 2002

Before JOLLY, WIENER and STEWART, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM: *

Allen Nicholas Tassin appeals his conviction for kidnaping and use and carrying of a firearm

in relation to that crime. T assin argues that the district court plainly erred by failing to admonish the

jury following a juror’s comment on his failure to testify. S ee United States v. Griffith

, 118 F.3d 324,

325-26 (5th Cir. 1997). The reference to the failure to testify was spontaneo us, it was a singleoccurrence, Tassin’s exculpatory story discounting the cred i bilit y of the primary witnesses against

him was nonexistent, and the evidence that the vict ims did not consent to being transported across

state lines is overwhelming. In failing to admonish the jury, t h e district court error, if any, was

harmless. Chapman v. United States , 547 F.2d 1240, 1249-50 (5th Cir. 1977).

Tassin argues that the district court abused its discreti o n in allo wing the Government to

present expert testi m

ony

. U nited States v. Williams

, 822 F.2d 512, 516 (5th Cir. 1987). As the

district court concluded in den ying Tassin’s motion for a new trial on this point, any evidence

regarding Tassin’s moti ve in set t ing fire to the car was inconsequential in the face of the

overwhelming direct evidence of the kidnaping. Tassin has not shown reversible error with respect

to this issue.

Tassin argues that the district c o urt abused its discretion by not allowing him to present

evidence of specific acts to show that a vict im, ca lled as a defense witness, was not credible. The

record is clear that the witness made a false police report and did not have a reputati on for being

truthful. Tassin has not shown that evidence of specific acts would not be simply cumulative of

established facts. S ee U n ited States v. Greer

, 939 F.2d 1076, 1096-97 (5th Cir. 1991), related

portion reinstated , 968 F.2d 433, 434 (5th Cir. 1992) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43006

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

CASEY GENE GILSON JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 693

Filed: November 4, 2015

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bonneville County. Hon. Jon J. Shindurling, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and sentences, affirmed. 

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Casey Gene Gilson Jr. pleaded guilty to rape of a female under the age of 16 where the

perpetrator is 18 years of age or older, Idaho Code § 18-6101, and a violation of a no contact 

order, Idaho Code §§ 18-920, 18-920(3). The district court imposed a twenty-five-year sentence, 

with three years determinate, and a concurrent, indeterminate five-year sentence, respectively. 

Gilson appeals, contending that his sentences are excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 
2

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Gilson’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**MAC R1204-0109062 Old Annapolis RoadColumbia, MD 21045Tel: 410 884 2000 Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.383 Madison Avenue31st FloorNew York, New York 10179  RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-C13 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C13 Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"): (a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and (b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.  March 1, 2016/s/ Brian SmithBRIAN SMITHVice President  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  ------------

I, Ludwig Kuttner, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Hampshire Group,
     Limited;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we 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
          registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
          us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this report is being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
          of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c)   disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
          most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
          reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting;

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
     committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
     equivalent function):

     a)   all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
          operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are
          reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting.

Date   November 6, 2003
------------------------

/s/ Ludwig Kuttner
------------------
Ludwig Kuttner
Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7



<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           69,140
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            0
<EQUITIES>                                     28,885
<MORTGAGE>                                     156
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  3,490
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 106,322
<CASH>                                         22,284
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         4,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 146,803
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                80,057
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            187
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 1,377
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          15,441
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                8,375
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,763
<OTHER-SE>                                     31,377
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   146,803
<PREMIUMS>                                     5,722
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            1,425
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             4,794
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 45
<BENEFITS>                                     4,405
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    123
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           2,664
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,609
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            2,909
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,909
<EPS-BASIC>                                    1.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.65
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0



</TABLE>
EX-35.17
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services

MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Rd
Columbia, MD 21045

Tel: 410 884 2000
Fax: 410 715 2380

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.
383 Madison Avenue
31st Floor
New York, New York 10179


RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for JPMBB Commercial Mortgage Securities
    Trust 2013-C12 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2013-C12

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2013 (the
"Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows
as of and for the year ending December 31, 2013 (the "Reporting Period"):

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its
    performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's
    supervision; and

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo
    has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
    respects throughout the Reporting Period.


March 7, 2014

/s/ Brian Smith
BRIAN SMITH
Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
     (AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

I, Charles R. Eitel, as Chief Executive Officer of Simmons Bedding Company (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), that to my knowledge:

            (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
      ended June 26, 2004 (the "Report"), being filed with the U.S. Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, 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 results of operations of
      the Company.

Date: August 10, 2004                          /s/ Charles R. Eitel
                                               -------------------------------
                                               Name: Charles R. Eitel
                                               Title:  Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Simmons Bedding Company and will be retained by Simmons Bedding
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

RICHARD FLOOD,

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 79 EM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30 th day of March , 2022, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or

Extraordinary Relief is DENIED.
#### Donatus I. AMARAM, Ph.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY; W. Eric Thomas, Ph.D., In his Official Capacity as Provost, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 07-1278.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2007.

Decided Jan. 7, 2008.

*553Wayne Marcus Scriven, Scriven Law Offices, Arlington, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert F. McDonnell, Attorney General of Virginia, William Cleveland Mims, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Maureen Riley Matsen, Deputy Attorney General, Sydney E. Rab, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Donatus I. Amaram appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his claims of discrimination, retaliation, violation of due process, and breach of contract against his employer Virginia State University and its Provost. We have reviewed the briefs and the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Amaram v. Virginia State University,*No. 3:06-cv-00444-JRS (E.D. Va. Sept. 14, 2006) and 476 F.Supp.2d 535 (E.D.Va.2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2344 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2344

 To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to the good time 
          credit toward service of sentences of imprisonment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 2011

  Mr. Scott of Virginia (for himself and Mr. Conyers) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to the good time 
          credit toward service of sentences of imprisonment.

    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 ``Prisoner Incentive Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. GOOD TIME CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Section 3624(b)(1) of title 18, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``, beyond the time served, of up to 54 
days at the end of each year of the prisoner's term of imprisonment, 
beginning at the end of the first year of the term,'' and inserting 
``of up to 54 days for each year of the prisoner's sentence imposed by 
the court,''.
    (b) Restoration of Credit.--Section 3624(b)(1) is amended by 
striking the sentence beginning ``Credit that has not been earned'' and 
inserting ``The Bureau may subsequently restore any or all credit 
previously denied, based on the prisoner's maintaining good behavior as 
determined by the Bureau.''.
    (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section apply with 
respect to each prison sentence that has not been completed before the 
date of the enactment of this Act, except any sentence imposed before 
November 1, 1987.
                                 <all>
```