alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amendment to the Ellie Mae, Inc. 2009 Stock Option and Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.24 
 AMENDMENT 
 TO THE 

ELLIE MAE, INC. 2009 STOCK OPTION AND INCENTIVE PLAN 
 Pursuant to the terms of the Ellie Mae, Inc. 2009 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), the Board of Directors of Ellie Mae, Inc. (the “Company”), approved this
amendment on April 9, 2010, and this amendment was approved by the Company’s stockholders on April 15, 2010: 

1. Section 7(a)(ii) of the Plan shall be amended in to read in its entirety as follows: 

“(ii) In the case of a Nonstatutory Stock Option, the per share exercise price shall be no less than 100% of the fair market value
per Share on the date of grant; provided, however, that with respect to Nonstatutory Stock Options granted in April 2010, the per share exercise price shall be determined by the Committee and set forth in the Award Agreement and such price per share
may be less than 100% of the fair market value per Share on such date.” 
 2. Except as specifically provided for in this
amendment, the terms of the Plan shall be unmodified and shall remain in full force and effect. 
 The undersigned hereby
certifies that the foregoing amendment was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company effective as of April 9, 2010 and was approved by the stockholders of the Company on April 15, 2010. 

Executed on July 14, 2010. 
  

			
	ELLIE MAE, INC.
	
	By: /s/    Sigmund Anderman
	Name: Sigmund Anderman
	Title: Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE HOUSTON EXPLORATION COMPANY SET FORTH IN THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           3,412
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,143
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,077
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,716
<PP&E>                                       1,162,510
<DEPRECIATION>                                 541,247
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 686,737
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,383
<BONDS>                                        279,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           290
<OTHER-SE>                                     305,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   306,039
<SALES>                                         48,918
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                49,348
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,929
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,752
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,021
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,646
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,197
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,449
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,449
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.18

 

Summary of Director Compensation

 

We pay our non-employee directors, who consist of all our directors other than our chief executive officer, an annual fee of $75,000 for their services as directors. We pay an annual fee of $25,000 to the chair of the audit committee, $20,000 to the chair of the compensation committee, $10,000 to the chairs of the executive committee and the nominating and corporate governance committee, and $5,000 to each non-employee director who serves as a member, but not the chair, of any committee for service on each committee above one. Our chairman also receives an annual fee, as well as office space, support services, and healthcare benefits, for his services as chairman of our board.  In light of the current economic downturn, our chairman has voluntarily reduced his annual fee for calendar year 2010 from $150,000 to $125,000. Directors who are employees do not receive separate fees for their services as directors. All of the payments described in this paragraph are made in cash.

 

Under the terms of our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, each director who is not employed by, and does not provide independent contractor services as a consultant or advisor to, us or our subsidiaries receives automatic restricted stock awards. We refer to these directors as our “outside directors.” Currently, our outside directors are Drs. Moriarty, Robertson and Rose, and Messrs. Concannon, Maheu and Schleyer. Each outside director who is re-elected as one of our directors or whose term continues after our annual meeting of shareholders each year will, on the date of the annual meeting, receive a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, valued at $75,000, based on the closing price of our common stock as of that date. Each person who is first elected an outside director at the annual meeting will receive, on the date of his or her election, a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, in an amount to be determined by our board of directors.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Joseph ANGELET, Eleanor Virellas, Maria Acevedo and Joseph Evans, Defendants.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

May 4, 1960.

S. Hazard Gillespie, Jr., U. S. Atty., for Southern Dist. of New York, New York City, for plaintiff; Paul J. Curran, Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City, of counsel.

Davis & Krieger, New York City, for defendant Joseph Angelet; Theodore Krieger, New York City, of counsel.

METZNER, District Judge.

The motion pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., to examine statements taken from the defendants, is denied. It appears that the defendants did not furnish signed statements. United States v. Singer, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1956, 19 F.R.D. 90.

The motion seeking a bill of particulars, pursuant to Rule 7(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, is disposed of as follows:

As to the first 6 counts of the indictment, Items 1 and 2 are granted to the extent consented to by the Government. Item 3 is granted. Item 4 is denied. Item 5 is granted on consent. Item 6 is denied. Item 7 is granted. This disposition is in conformity with the great weight of authority in this district in this type of case. See also United States v. Smith, D.C.W.D.Mo.1954, 16 F.R.D. 372, and Roviaro v. United States, 1957, 353 U.S. 53, 77 S.Ct. 623, 1 L.Ed.2d 639.

As to the 7th count, Items 1 and 2 are granted to the extent consented to by the Government. Item 3 is denied.

As to the 8th count, Items 4, 5, 6, 10, 11 and 12 are granted. Items 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are denied.

The motion seeking an analysis of the alleged narcotic drugs is denied.

So ordered.
#### Ogden *against*Parks.

Where jurors, CourtJuSt'are “he 1Ien|ro!ind that they are not freeliolders, the fact may be tried by an examijurors “them! selves, under o.ath.

IN ERROR, on certiorari, to a Justice’s Court. The cause was tried in the Court below, before a jury* jn order to complete the jury, two tales-men were sum-r J moned, and when they appeared, the defendant below ob«> . . jected to them as not being freeholders, and requested the Justice to examine them upon oath, as to that fact. This ' *181the Justice refused ; hut inquired of the jurors whether, they were freeholders, to, which they answered in the affirmalive, and were then sworn as jurors to try the cause. A verdict and judgment wére rendered for the plaintiff helow, who is the defendant in error.

*Per Curiam.*

That the jurors were not freeholders was undoubtedly a good ground of challenge, and the question is, how it was to be proved. The jurors themselves had no interest in the question, and were competent witnesses as to that fact. This sudden and unexpected occurrence at the trial cannot be guarded against, or be met in any other way ; and from the necessity of the case, this kind of evidence must he resorted to, or the objection, though well founded, can seldom avail. The Justice, therefore, erred, and the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 44484]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20270]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10135]


Determination Pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me as the Secretary of State 
under the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), I 
hereby determine it is reasonably necessary to achieve one or more of 
the purposes set forth in section 204(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 4304(b)) 
to designate 353 Lexington Ave, Suite 1500, New York, NY 10016, which 
is leased by the Government of the Russian Federation, as a location 
and facilities for which entry or access is strictly prohibited by any 
and all representatives or employees of the Russian Government and 
their dependents, or persons acting on their behalf, without first 
obtaining written permission from the Department of State's Office of 
Foreign Missions. Such prohibitions will take effect as of 2:00 p.m. 
Eastern Daylight Time on September 2, 2017.
    As a result, any and all representatives or employees of the 
Russian Government and their dependents, or persons acting on their 
behalf, are required to depart the premises no later than the date and 
time stated above.
    Access to the property by the persons listed above will be subject 
to terms and conditions set forth by the Office of Foreign Missions.

Rex W. Tillerson,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2017-20270 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY

#### Maurice P. Fox et al. v. Guaranty Bank & Trust Co.

January 14, 1983

Case No. (Law) 23736

By JUDGE CHARLES H. DUFF

I have carefully examined the memoranda of the parties which are part of the file and the authorities cited therein. The narrow and precise issue presented by the Defendant’s assertion of the Statute of Limitations is: "When did the present claim against the Bank accrue?"

Plaintiffs contend the cause accrued in 1980 when the account was closed and the Bank refused to credit it with the funds which had allegedly been improperly deducted in 1976. Plaintiffs argue that there was no deduction, in law; that the wrongful deduction was a nullity, did not exist and cites *Central National Bank*v. *First & Merchants National*Bank, 171 Va. 289 (1964), in support thereof. Defendant contends and Plaintiffs concede that all wrongful deductions had been made prior to July 30, 1976, and that even a five year Statute of Limitations had run prior to their action being filed on July 6, 1982. I agree with the Defendant.

The *Central National Bank*Court was not concerned with a Statute of Limitations issue. The language quoted by Plaintiffs regarding a wrongful deduction being a "nullity" referred to the depositor’s rights. It has long been recognized that a forged signature is no signature and a depositor has the same rights to his account balance as it existed before the *75deduction on the basis of a forged signature. However, for Statute of Limitations purposes, the wrongful deduction against a depositor’s account, such being brought to the attention of the depositor as here, completes the violation of a duty to the depositor. The cause of action accrues at that time in my judgment and suit could be promptly brought.

Accordingly, the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment based on the running of the Statute of Limitations is granted.
Exhibit 32
                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Retrospettiva,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (the "Report"),
I, Borijove Vukadinovic, the Company's Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of
my knowledge:

         (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 results of the Company.


Date:    May 11, 2009


/s/ Borivoje Vukadinovic
------------------------
Borivoje Vukadinovic,
Principal Executive Officer


/s/ Borivoje Vukadinovic
------------------------
Borivoje Vukadinovic,
Principal Financial Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2702 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the scope of the provision 

commonly referred to as the ‘‘Wire Act’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2011 

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

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the scope 

of the provision commonly referred to as the ‘‘Wire Act’’, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Wire Clarification Act 

5 of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SCOPE OF SO-CALLED ‘‘WIRE ACT’’. 

7 Section 1084 of title 18, United States Code, is 

8 amended by adding at the end the following new sub9 section: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2702 IH

1 ‘‘(f) CLARIFICATION OF SCOPE.—This section, sub2 chapter IV of chapter 53 of title 31, United States Code 

3 (enacted into law by the Unlawful Internet Gambling En4 forcement Act of 2006), and any other provision of Fed5 eral law that establishes criminal penalties for any activity 

6 involved in placing, receiving or otherwise transmitting a 

7 bet or wager shall not apply to any bet or wager that is 

8 permissible under the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 

9 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.).’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of
Chief Executive Officer of
Gold Banc Corporation, Inc.

I, Malcolm
M. Aslin,  Chief Executive  Officer of Gold Banc  Corporation,  Inc.,  hereby  certify,
in  accordance  with 18 U.S.C.  § 1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002  ("Section 906"), that:

| | (a.) | The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005, which
accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of  Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (b.) | The
information contained in the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2005, which accompanies this certification, fairly presents,  in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations  of Gold Banc
Corporation, Inc.
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated:  November 4, 2005.

| | By:                                                   | /s/ MALCOLM  M. ASLIN | 
| | ----------------------------------------------------- | --------------------- | 
| | Malcolm M. AslinPresident and Chief Executive Officer |
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.17
                [Letterhead of WorldPort Communications, Inc.]



June 29, 1999

Mr. John T. Hanson
1361 Bridgewater Lane
Long Grove, IL  60047

Dear Mr. Hanson,

I am pleased to confirm our offer to you for the position of Chief Financial
Officer at WorldPort Communications, Inc. In this position you will report to me
and work out of our Chicago office.

Your starting base salary will be at the annual rate of $235,000 to be paid at
regular intervals under the standard WorldPort payroll system.  You will also be
eligible for an annual bonus of $90,000.  You may actually make more or less
than the targeted amount based on you and the company achieving objectives.  You
are guaranteed to receive your full bonus for 1999.

Upon the approval of the board of directors, you will receive a stock option
grant of 150,000 shares of WorldPort Communications, Inc. stock with a strike
price set at 85% of closing market price on June 29, 1999.  1/3 of these shares
will vest on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant.  A detailed
option agreement will be provided separately.

Should there be a change of control of the company resulting in the involuntary
termination of your employment you will be guaranteed a severance payment equal
to one year of your base salary.  In addition, if such change of control takes
place, all of the above mentioned options will vest at the time of that change
of control.

You will also be eligible for the standard WorldPort benefits including health,
dental, vision, LTD, AD&D and insurance.  As soon as you return the signed offer
agreement we will forward the necessary enrollment paperwork.

This offer of employment is the entire offer to you.  There are no other
expressed or implied promises, representations or contracts being offered to
you.  Your employment at WorldPort will be "at will."  You or the company will
have the right to terminate your employment at any time with or without cause.

In order for WorldPort to comply with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986 as amended you will have to provide WorldPort with the necessary
documentation which verifies your legal right to work in the United States of
America at the time of your employment

<PAGE>

John, we are excited about the future of WorldPort and about your joining our
team.  Please indicate your acceptance of this offer by signing below and
returning an original copy to the attention of Maria Haug in Human Resources at
our Atlanta office July 6, 1999.  You may retain the second copy I have enclosed
for your records.

Sincerely,

/s/ Carl Grivner
-------------------------
Carl Grivner
President & CEO


/s/ John T. Hanson
-------------------------
John T. Hanson

June 29, 1999
-------------
Date
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 23

- 00435

- CV

D ANIEL V

ILLANUEVA

, Appellant

V

.

RNA F INANCIAL LLC , Appellee §

§

§

§ O n Appeal from the 352nd District Court

of Tarra nt County ( 352

- 325638

- 21 )

July 11, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the tr ial

court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellant Daniel Villanueva shall bear the costs of this

appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dana Womack

Justice Dana Womack
##### 



Exhibit 4(c)(iv)
 New
InterContinental Hotels Group PLC  Registered Office: 67 Alma Road, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 3HD
Registered Number: 5134420
  
  New
InterContinental Hotels Group PLC (the Company)
  IHG
      Admission
  1




---



##### 



IHG Group
 Service Agreement
  Signed as a DeedbyNew InterContinental Hotels Group PLC
    
    
    )acting by
    
    
    )Director
    
    
    )Secretary
    
    
    )
    
    
    /s/ R. T. WinterSigned as a Deedby
    
    
    )Stevan D. Porter
    
    
    )
    
    
    /s/ Stevan D. PorterIn the presence of:
    
    
    )Witnesss signature
    
    
    )
    
    
    /s/ Susan Aimèe WalkerWitnesss name:
    
    
    )
    
    
    Susan Aimèe WalkerWitnesss address:
    
    
    )
    
    
    Flat B373 Sandycombe RoadKewSurvey TW9 3PRWitnesss occupation:
    
    
    )
    
    
    Secretary
  2
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of AMF Bowling Worldwide, Inc. (the
Company), certifies that:



|1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 26, 2004 (the Report) of the Company to which this certification is an exhibit fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)).
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of September 26, 2004 and for
the period then ended.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: November 8, 2004



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Frederick R. Hipp                
|Frederick R. Hipp                    
|President and Chief Executive Officer



42
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0494

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

DAVID ALAN SPAGNOLO,

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 May 31, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 26 2021

04/26/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0494