alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Windstream Corporation Director Compensation Program



 Exhibit 10.2 
 WINDSTREAM CORPORATION 
 Director Compensation Program 

Approved February 9, 2011 
 Compensation for directors who are not officers of the Corporation will consist of the following components: 
  

	 	1.	Initial Retainer. Each new member will receive a grant of $60,000 in restricted stock under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, in connection with his or
her appointment or election to the Board. 

  

	 	2.	Annual Retainer. Each member will receive an annual cash retainer of $60,000. Commencing with 2010, the Chairman will receive a supplemental annual cash retainer
of $100,000. 

  

	 	3.	Meeting Fees. Each member will receive a cash fee of $2,000 for each Board and Committee meeting attended, except that no meeting fee will be paid for meetings
(i) of the Governance Committee or (ii) at which the Board receives periodic updates from management and no actions are taken by the Board. 

  

	 	4.	Committee Chair Fees. Each member who serves as Chair of a Board Committee will receive the following indicated annual cash fee: 


 

									
	 •      
	 	Audit	  	-	  	$20,000	  	
					
	 •      
	 	Compensation	  	-	  	$15,000	  	
					
	 •      
	 	Governance	  	-	  	$ - 0 -	  	

  

	 	5.	Annual Restricted Stock. Each member will receive an annual grant of $80,000 in restricted stock under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended.


 All other terms and conditions of the grants of restricted stock shall be determined and approved by the Compensation
Committee. 
 Directors may elect to receive any annual cash retainer or fee in the form of shares of Windstream common stock. 

Members will receive a prorated amount of the Annual Retainer, Committee Chair Fees and Annual Restricted Stock Grant for the portion of the first year
for which they are appointed or elected to serve as a Board member or Committee Chair. For future years, directors will receive the Annual Retainer, Committee Chair Fees and Restricted Stock grants at the first regularly scheduled board meeting of
the year. 
 02/11
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 Sixteenth Amendment to the  Sterling Chemicals, Inc.  Amended and Restated Salaried Employees Pension Plan
 Whereas Corporation Existing
Plan
 Whereas
 Whereas Amendment
 Now, Therefore
 Amendment of Section 4.5 of the Existing Plan
  Effect of Amendments
 Binding Effect
 Severability




---



##### 



Governing Law To The Extent Not Superseded By The Laws Of The United
States, This Amendment Shall Be Construed and Enforced in Accordance With, and
the Rights of the Parties Shall Be Governed By, the Internal Laws of the State of Texas, Without
Reference to Principles of Conflicts of Law.
 In Witness Whereof
 Sterling Chemicals, Inc./s/ Richard K. CrumpRichard K. Crump, President and ChiefExecutive Officer
 -2-
#### Angela M. Rodriguez, Appellant, v Robert Doar, as Commissioner of Onondaga County Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 7, 2008;

decided February 12, 2008

Motion for reargument denied *[see*9 NY3d 987 (2007)].
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Jason
Kulas, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the
period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2013-3 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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 report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed
by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports,
the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance
with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the
following unaffiliated parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.



/s/ Jason KulasName:

Jason KulasTitle:

President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:

March 28, 2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          15,957
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     34,181
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         707,479
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           711,816
<LOANS>                                      1,672,234
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,596
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,459,784
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,629,062
<SHORT-TERM>                                   614,090
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             23,755
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           143
<OTHER-SE>                                     192,734
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,459,784
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                114,121
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               38,902
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    82
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               153,105
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              73,358
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              90,879
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           62,226
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    3,950
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 22,591
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 37,826
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      37,826
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    24,325
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.90
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                     21,345
<LOANS-PAST>                                     3,014
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,137
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    5,668
<RECOVERIES>                                       177
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,956
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,956
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        



</TABLE>
OFFICE OF THE Al-l-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

op3nionloo.

O-711 R8r Ttre

C?iftWt OfHen. W. Lee O*Daniel,June 10, 1999, Page 2

intentionhave btwm filed with the proper authorities,

and that suoh per005 ,&all be a bcna fide residentOr tha state of Texas far at least SIX (6)months Immediatelyprior to the inakin&

or appllaatim to the Habdreesing and/or Cosmetolog;y Departmentfor pcmaieeion to take such exsmlnstfon to entttle such per8011 to so pm&Ice 3alrdressingand/oraosmetology orany of Its branahes in this State."
Seoticn 1 of muss Bill lS9 (Artloleos.Uj q the present tlw rea4B M fulluw~

saltoengagehtha 

### efahdrdrea8aror**.Horl. :;.**  Lee OlDaniel,June 10, X39, Page 3

Se have not been asked to pass upon the validfty of the prcvisim of substituteS.B. 100, whioh rrould requirea hair&essar or oosmetolO&st to **be a**  **oiti%en** of the United **Statea** of America,but we feel that it is our duty to point out that mid provlslon Is a olear vlol&ion of the 14th Aslendment o the Oonstltuticn of the United States,which **dealares** that no state shall deprive any person al'

life, liberty **or** propartywithout dus process of law, nor **deny** to any person within its jurlsdiotion the equal proteotim of the laws.HOD.. &. Lee o*Daniel.,

June 10, 1999, Page 4

Se cite as authority the case of Tezplarv, Ei:ichi~an

State Board of miners of Barbers (Supresm Court of NiChi@iIl) 131 tioh. 254, 90 I?%10058.

In that case it wa8 held that Act No. 2l2 Pub. Acts 1899, B 5, lkichigan, providingfor the exsml&on and licensingoi'

barbers,and stipulating that 50 pewon eb~ll reoeive a oertitioate, who at the tirm ot hia (ILaminatim la an alien, is repugnantto the 14th Amendment of the IJuited

StutesConstitution, as denying equal protection of the law, lu so far as it discriminates gl aaoouut of oitizenship.Eon. IT. Lee O'lhniczl,

June 10, 1939, Pa@ 5

requisiteknowledgeupon the subjeotepreacrlbed by the Lag%alaturc to praotloehis oolling without endangering the health of his patrons. To hold that he Is not entitledto praotioe this calling,beoauaenot a full citizen of the United States, is 

### to deny to him rights whioh we think are preservedby the fourteenth amendmnt.W
a* holdthat theprotislon42r mastitutss.t).

### mototkeerr66tal8talyp6r6oa6ag6glaginfhepraetl6e %.r

### 066upistior ur 8 -sar ur uommtu&gl6t or 06nda6tioe:

a Bsirdrelultlg

or **uuem&ulogUul eatabw**  **Allt** ***almll b6**  **a eit;Mlr**  **ur th8**  

### ualt6d**stat66 6r**  **Amml6u clp** **pzwhati prooi**  **to th6**  **prepor A&lnl&r8t1ve**  **r4ntharit~**

w&t& **the** prupar **autkfmitlefl ti**  **UWast**
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, or Support Terrorism

On September 23, 2001, by Executive Order 13224, the President declared a national emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by grave acts of terrorism and threats of terrorism committed by foreign terrorists, including the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, in New York and Pennsylvania and against the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks against United States nationals or the United States.

The actions of persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, and the measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond September 23, 2017. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism declared in Executive Order 13224.

                        This notice shall be published in the                         *Federal Register*                         and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. 2017-20127

Billing code 3295-F7-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohammed ZYOUT, aka Abu Ghazi, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Omar Jdaitawi, a/k/a Omar Ghazi Jdaitawai, Omar Ghazi Aljdaitawai, Omar Ghazi Aljaitawi and Omar Al Jdaitawi, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 05-50403, 05-50517.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 3, 2008.*

Filed June 13, 2008.

Christopher M. Brunwin, Esq., USLAOffice of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Becky S. Walker, Esq., for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kenneth M. Stern, Esq., Law Offices Kenneth M. Stern, Woodland Hills, CA, Defendant-Appellant.

Mohammed Zyout, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

Before: GIBSON,** O’SCANNLAIN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable John R. Gibson, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Mohammed Zyout and Omar Jdaitawi, brothers and co-defendants, appeal their convictions arising from the sale of large *593quantities of pseudoephedrine tablets. Both were convicted of one count of conspiracy to possess pseudoephedrine and one count of attempt to possess pseudoephedrine. Mohammed was also convicted of two counts of witness tampering, and Omar was found guilty of two weapons violations.

Each defendant’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), asserting that they could identify no non-frivolous issues on appeal. However, both identified arguable claims for this court’s attention. The attorneys have also filed motions to be relieved as counsel for their respective clients. Mohammed and Omar filed two joint pro se briefs: a supplemental opening brief and a reply to the government’s brief.

Our examination of the briefs and our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no arguable issues for review on direct appeal.

Accordingly, we GRANT counsels’ motions to withdraw and AFFIRM the judgments.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 242 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 242

   To clarify the implementation and enforcement of Subpart B of the 
  Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212), relating to the designation of 
roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use, in administrative units 
  of the National Forest System in California, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2011

 Mr. Herger (for himself, Mr. McClintock, Mr. McCarthy of California, 
and Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To clarify the implementation and enforcement of Subpart B of the 
  Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212), relating to the designation of 
roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use, in administrative units 
  of the National Forest System in California, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SUBPART B OF THE TRAVEL 
              MANAGEMENT RULE ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND IN 
              CALIFORNIA.

    (a) Consideration of Routes Not Previously Considered.--No funds 
appropriated or otherwise made available to the Secretary of 
Agriculture may be used to implement or enforce Subpart B of the Travel 
Management Rule (subpart B of part 212 of title 36, Code of Federal 
Regulations), relating to the designation of roads, trails, and areas 
for motor vehicle use, in an administrative unit of the National Forest 
System in California unless the Secretary has completed post-Subpart B 
Project Level Trail Planning of unauthorized routes in the unit not 
considered in subpart B.
    (b) Treatment of Maintenance-Level 3 Roads.--In implementing 
Subpart B of the Travel Management Rule in an administrative unit of 
the National Forest System in California, the Secretary of Agriculture 
may not treat a maintenance-level 3 road (as defined in the Forest 
Service Handbook) as a ``highway'' for purposes of determining 
applicability of division 16.5 of the California Vehicle Code (section 
38000 et seq.), relating to off-highway motor vehicles.
                                 <all>
```
FIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 18-0597 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

VAUGHN DAVID JAMES, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

MAY 10 2022 

BC3Wen Greenwood 

of Supreme Court 

r-0 Montana 

ORDER 

Following this Court's stay of appeal and remand to the District Court for additional 

rulings, Appellant Vaughn David James filed his opening brief in this matter on October 

25, 2021. The State's Brief in Response presently is due May 25, 2022. 

The State now moves to strike Appellant's Appendices C, D, E, and G. Each is a 

document from a separate case, State v. Noel, Montana Twentieth Judicial District Court, 

Sanders County Cause No. DC-16-51. Ms. Noel is the victim of the offense with which 

James was charged. The appendices relate to James's argument that the District Court 

erred in excluding evidence about Noel's charges in Sanders County, which James argued 

was relevant to prove Noel's motive to fabricate a sexual assault claim against him to 

excuse her bond violations and to garner a lenient sentence in her own criminal case. The 

State objects to this Court's consideration of those documents because they were not in the 

District Court record in James's case and are not part of the record on appeal. The motion 

requests that the Court also strike references in the Opening Brief to these appendices and 

to related information from the proceedings against Noel, none of which was before the 

District Court in this rnatter when it rnade the rulings challenged on appeal. 

The State represents that counsel for the Appellant was contacted about the motion 

to strike and objects. Appellant, however, has filed no response. 

05/10/2022

Case Number: DA 18-0597
Upon consideration, the Court concludes that the motion is well taken. 

M. R. App. P. 8(1) defines the record on appeal as "the original papers and exhibits filed 

in the district court, the transcript of proceedings, if any, and a certified copy of the docket 

entries prepared by the clerk of the district court," in addition to a copy of any challenged 

jury instruction. "Parties on appeal are bound by the record." Brunette v. State, 2016 MT 

128, ¶ 16, 383 Mont. 458, 372 P.3d 476 (quoting State v. MacKinnon, 1998 MT 78, ¶ 15, 

288 Mont. 329, 957 P.2d 23). This Court's review will be based on evidence that was 

before the District Court when it made its rulings. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the State's motion is GRANTED. Appendices 

C, D, E, and G to Appellant's Opening Brief are hereby stricken, and the Court will 

disregard any factual statements or arguments in the Appellant's brief that reference or rely 

on them. 

The Clerk is directed to notify all counsel of record of the entry of this Order. 

`)ta.. 

DATED this 16 day of May, 2022. 

Chief Justice 

Justices
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0677 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. GILBERT CAMPA,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 13 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 7 2023

08/07/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0677
III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 175 

Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of the United States 

to building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and economic well-being 

of the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2015 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. MORAN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. CASEY, 

Mr. MARKEY, Mr. KIRK, Ms. AYOTTE, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mrs. SHAHEEN, 

Mr. COONS, Mr. WARNER, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. MURPHY, Ms. BALDWIN, 

Ms. HIRONO, Mr. BOOKER, Ms. WARREN, Mr. HEINRICH, and Mr. 

MENENDEZ) submitted the following resolution; which was considered 

and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of 

the United States to building and enhancing the civic, 

cultural, and economic well-being of the United States. 

Whereas education and knowledge provide the foundation of 

the current and future strength of the United States; 

Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and 

deserve the respect of students and communities for the 

selfless dedication of the teachers to community service 

and to the futures of the children of the United States; 

Whereas the purpose of National Teacher Appreciation Week, 

celebrated from May 4 through May 8, 2015, is to raise 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•SRES 175 ATS 

public awareness of the unquantifiable contributions of 

teachers and to promote greater respect and understanding for the teaching profession; and 

Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations representing educators are hosting teacher 

appreciation events in recognition of National Teacher 

Appreciation Week: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate thanks the teachers of the 

2 United States and promotes the profession of teaching by 

3 encouraging students, parents, school administrators, and 

4 public officials to participate in teacher appreciation 

5 events during National Teacher Appreciation Week. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS