alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
First Amendment to the Hyatt Hotels Corporation Corporate Office Severance Plan



 Exhibit 10.34 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 
 HYATT HOTELS CORPORATION 

CORPORATE OFFICE SEVERANCE PLAN 
 THIS AMENDMENT to the Hyatt Hotels Corporation Corporate Office Severance Plan (the “Plan”) is effective as of January 1, 2009 consistent with Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
Notice 2010-6, as modified by IRS Notice 2010-80 (the “IRS Notices”). 
 WHEREAS, the Plan provides
certain severance benefits to executives of the Hyatt Hotels Corporation (the “Company”) and its affiliates in the event of an involuntary termination of employment; and 

WHEREAS, the Company desires to clarify the timing of releases under the Plan to be consistent with the terms of Section 409A
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and the IRS Notices. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Company hereby amends the
Plan in the following particulars: 
  

	 	1.	Effective as of January 1, 2009, Section IV of the Plan is amended by adding the following at the end of the Time of Payment provision:


 “In the event that any portion of your Severance Benefits or the Additional Benefits are
treated as non-qualified deferred compensation subject to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and the timing of the delivery of the Release could cause such Severance Benefits or Additional Benefits to begin in one or another taxable
year, then notwithstanding the foregoing, your Severance Benefits and/or Additional Benefits shall commence on the later of the next regularly scheduled payroll of the Company after the Release has become irrevocable and enforceable, or the first
regularly scheduled payroll of the Company in the taxable year following your termination.” 
  

	 	2.	In all other respects, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

 * * * * * 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing First Amendment was duly adopted
by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Hyatt Hotels Corporation on December 16, 2010. 
 Executed on this 17 day of
December, 2010. 
  

	
	
	/s/ Robert W. K. Webb
	Chief Human Resources Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2541 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2541

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to exempt the conduct 
     of silvicultural activities from national pollutant discharge 
              elimination system permitting requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2011

   Ms. Herrera Beutler (for herself, Mr. Schrader, Mr. Michaud, Mrs. 
McMorris Rodgers, Ms. Pingree of Maine, and Mr. Walden) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to exempt the conduct 
     of silvicultural activities from national pollutant discharge 
              elimination system permitting requirements.

    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 ``Silviculture Regulatory Consistency 
Act''.

SEC. 2. SILVICULTURAL ACTIVITIES.

    Section 402(l) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
U.S.C. 1342(l)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) Silvicultural activities.--
                    ``(A) NPDES permit requirements for silvicultural 
                activities.--The Administrator shall neither require a 
                permit under this section, nor directly or indirectly 
                require any State to require a permit under this 
                section, for a discharge resulting from the conduct of 
                any silvicultural activity, such as nursery operations, 
                site preparation, reforestation and subsequent cultural 
                treatment, thinning, prescribed burning, pest and fire 
                control, harvesting operations, surface drainage, or 
                road use, construction, and maintenance, from which 
                there is runoff.
                    ``(B) Permits for dredged or fill material.--
                Nothing in this paragraph exempts the conduct of a 
                silvicultural activity resulting in the discharge of 
                dredged or fill material from any permitting 
                requirement under section 404.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>                                                 Exhibit 24



                        POWER OF ATTORNEY

                     AEP GENERATING COMPANY
      Annual Report on Form lO-K for the Fiscal Year Ended
                        December 31, 1997                 


     The undersigned directors of AEP GENERATING COMPANY, an Ohio
corporation (the "Company"), do hereby constitute and appoint E.
LINN DRAPER, JR., G. P. MALONEY and P. J. DeMARIA, and each of
them, their attorneys-in-fact and agents, to execute for them,
and in their names, and in any and all of their capacities, the
Annual Report of the Company on Form lO-K, pursuant to Section 13
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 1997, and any and all amendments thereto, and to
file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in
connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commis-
sion, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each
of them, full power and authority to do and perform every act and
thing required or necessary to be done, as fully to all intents
and purposes as the undersigned might or could do in person,
hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact
and agents, or any of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done
by virtue hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have signed these
presents this 28th day of January, 1998.



/s/ P. J. DeMaria                  /s/ Wm. J. Lhota              
P. J. DeMaria                      Wm. J. Lhota


/s/ E. Linn Draper, Jr.            /s/ G. P. Maloney             
E. Linn Draper, Jr.                G. P. Maloney


/s/ Henry W. Fayne                 /s/ James J. Markowsky        
Henry W. Fayne                     James J. Markowsky


/s/ John R. Jones             
John R. Jones
* 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. 01-20150 Conference Calendar

DAVID J. MORRISON Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus GARY JOHNSON; VICTOR RODRIGUEZ, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CV-4028

-------------------- June 14, 2001 Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas inmate, David J. Morrison, # 425314, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, following the district court’s dismissal as frivolous of his civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By moving for IFP status, Morrison is challenging the district court’s certification that IFP status should not be granted on appeal because his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).No. 01-20150 -2- Morrison has failed to challenge specifically the district court’s finding that his appeal was not taken in good faith and was legally frivolous. Although this court liberally construes
pro se briefs, see Grant v. Cuellar , 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995), the court requires arguments to be briefed in order to be preserved. Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Because Morrison has failed to address the only appealable issue, the district court’s certification of the appeal as frivolous, he has abandoned the issue on appeal. See id

. Morrison’s request for IFP status is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a “strike” for purposes of § 1915(g), as does the district court’s dismissal of Morrison’s complaint as frivolous.
See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). He therefore has two “strikes” under § 1915(g). Morrison is WARNED that if he accumulates three “strikes” pursuant to § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; STRIKE WARNING ISSUED
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2492 

To prohibit attendance of an animal fighting venture, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 11, 2011 

Mr. MARINO (for himself and Ms. SUTTON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to 

the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit attendance of an animal fighting venture, 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 ‘‘Animal Fighting Spec5 tator Prohibition Act of 2011’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2492 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ATTENDING AN ANIMAL FIGHT OR 

2 CAUSING A MINOR TO ATTEND AN ANIMAL 

3 FIGHT. 

4 Section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 

5 2156) is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (a)— 

7 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘SPON8 SORING OR EXHIBITING AN ANIMAL IN’’ and in9 serting ‘‘SPONSORING OR EXHIBITING AN ANI10 MAL IN, ATTENDING, OR CAUSING A MINOR TO

11 ATTEND’’; 

12 (B) in paragraph (1)— 

13 (i) in the heading, by striking ‘‘IN

14 GENERAL’’ and inserting ‘‘SPONSORING OR

15 EXHIBITING’’; and 

16 (ii) by striking ‘‘paragraph (2)’’ and 

17 inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)’’; 

18 (C) by redesignating paragraph (2) as 

19 paragraph (3); and 

20 (D) by inserting after paragraph (1) the 

21 following new paragraph: 

22 ‘‘(2) ATTENDING OR CAUSING A MINOR TO AT23 TEND.—It shall be unlawful for any person to— 

24 ‘‘(A) knowingly attend an animal fighting 

25 venture; or 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2492 IH

1 ‘‘(B) cause a minor to attend an animal 

2 fighting venture.’’; and 

3 (2) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the 

4 following new paragraph: 

5 ‘‘(5) the term ‘minor’ means a person under the 

6 age of 18 years old.’’. 

7 SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT OF ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBI8 TIONS. 

9 Section 49 of title 18, United States Code, is amend10 ed— 

11 (1) by striking ‘‘Whoever’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) 

12 IN GENERAL.—Whoever’’; 

13 (2) in subsection (a), as designated by para14 graph (1) of this section, by striking ‘‘subsection 

15 (a),’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (a)(1),’’; and 

16 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub17 sections: 

18 ‘‘(b) ATTENDING AN ANIMAL FIGHTING VENTURE.— 

19 Whoever violates subsection (a)(2)(A) of section 26 of the 

20 Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) shall be fined under 

21 this title, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, 

22 for each violation. 

23 ‘‘(c) CAUSING A MINOR TO ATTEND AN ANIMAL

24 FIGHTING VENTURE.—Whoever violates subsection 

25 (a)(2)(B) of section 26 (7 U.S.C. 2156) of the Animal 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 2492 IH

1 Welfare Act shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for 

2 not more than 3 years, or both, for each violation.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1850 as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





I
      hereby
      certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that the
      accompanying Form 10-QSB of CN Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly
      period ended June 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and that the information
      contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company







/s/
      Jan
      W. Clark





Jan
      W.
      Clark


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


July
      26,
      2006




This
      certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
      and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure
      document, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person for any
      reason other than as specifically required by law.
EX-4.6








Exhibit 4.6

MATERIAL CHANGE REPORT

Regulation 51-102 Respecting Continuous Disclosure Obligations

Form 51-102F3





	1.	 	NAME AND ADDRESS OF COMPANY:
	 
	 	 	THERATECHNOLOGIES INC.

2310 Alfred-Nobel Boulevard

Montreal, Québec

Canada H4S 2B4
	 
	2.	 	DATE OF MATERIAL CHANGE:



February 3, 2011
	 
	3.	 	NEWS RELEASE:
	 
	 	 	A news release describing this material change was issued on February 3, 2011 on
“Marketwire”. A copy of the news release is available on the SEDAR website at
www.sedar.com.
	 
	4.	 	SUMMARY OF MATERIAL CHANGE:
	 
	 	 	On February 3, 2011, Theratechnologies Inc. (the “Company”) announced the execution of a
distribution and licensing agreement (the “Agreement”) with Ferrer Internacional S.A.
(“Ferrer”) for the commercialization rights to tesamorelin in Europe, Russia, South Korea,
Taiwan and certain central Asian countries for the treatment of excess abdominal fat in
HIV-infected patients with lipodystrophy.
	 
	5.	 	FULL DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CHANGE:
	 
	 	 	On February 3, 2011, the Company announced the execution of the Agreement with Ferrer for
the commercialization rights to tesamorelin in Europe, Russia, South Korea, Taiwan and
certain central Asian countries for the treatment of excess abdominal fat in HIV-infected
patients with lipodystrophy.
	 
	 	 	Under the terms of the Agreement, Ferrer will be responsible for conducting all regulatory
and commercialization activities in connection with tesamorelin for the treatment of
excess abdominal fat in HIV-infected patients with lipodystrophy in the territories
subject to the Agreement. Theratechnologies will be responsible for the manufacture and
supply of tesamorelin to Ferrer. Ferrer will purchase tesamorelin at a transfer price
equal to the higher of a significant percentage of the net selling price and a
predetermined floor price. Theratechnologies has the option to co-promote tesamorelin for
the reduction of excess abdominal fat in HIV-infected patients with lipodystrophy in the
territories. Theratechnologies has kept all development rights to tesamorelin for other
indications and will be responsible for conducting research and













 




-2-








	 	 	development for any additional programs. Ferrer has the option to enter into a
codevelopment and commercialization agreement using tesamorelin relating to any such new
indications. The terms and conditions of such a co-development and commercialization
agreement will be negotiated based on any additional program chosen for development.
	 
	6.	 	RELIANCE ON SUBSECTION 7.1(2) OR (3) OF NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 51-102:
	 
	 	 	Not applicable.
	 
	7.	 	OMITTED INFORMATION:
	 
	 	 	Not applicable.
	 
	8.	 	EXECUTIVE OFFICER:
	 
	 	 	For further information, contact Jocelyn Lafond, Vice President, Legal Affairs, and
Corporate Secretary of the Company at (514) 336-4804, ext. 288.
	 
	9.	 	DATE OF REPORT:
	 
	 	 	February 10, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON PAGES THREE THROUGH FIVE,
OF GEOLOGISTICS CORPORATION'S FORM 10Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 
1998 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-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          37,285
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  265,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,020
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               316,796
<PP&E>                                          68,096
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,889
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 488,762
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          296,307
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,779
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   488,762
<SALES>                                        365,664
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               365,664
<CGS>                                          276,626
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  368,344
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,434
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,127)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,957)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,328)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,328)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2620 

To provide for treatment of members of a certain Indian tribe under the 

Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 21, 2011 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT (for himself, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. 

PASTOR of Arizona, Mr. COLE, and Mr. DENHAM) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To provide for treatment of members of a certain Indian 

tribe under the Native American Housing Assistance and 

Self-Determination Act of 1996. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ASSISTANCE. 

4 The last undesignated paragraph under the heading 

5 ‘‘Management and Administration—Administrative Provi6 sions’’ in title II of the Departments of Veterans Affairs 

7 and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 

8 Agencies Appropriations Act, 1992 (Public Law 102–139; 

9 105 Stat. 760) is amended to read as follows: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2620 IH

1 ‘‘For purposes of the Native American Housing As2 sistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 

3 4101 et seq.) and any successor Federal housing program, 

4 members of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe who reside within the 

5 State of Arizona in the communities of Guadalupe, Tuc6 son, Coolidge, Eloy, Chandler, and Scottsdale, shall be 

7 considered (without fiscal year limitation) as residing on 

8 an Indian reservation or Indian area.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
*

  After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is

unnecessary.  Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record.  See FED. R. APP. P.

34(a)(2).

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois  60604

Submitted April 2, 2008*

Decided April 10, 2008

Before

     MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

                  ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

                             DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 07‐2805

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff‐Appellee,

v.

KATHY L. PERRY,

Defendant‐Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

No. 05‐CR‐101

William C. Griesbach,

Judge.

O R D E R

Kathy Perry pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine.  See 21 U.S.C.

§§ 846, 841(a)(1).  In December 2005 she was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment, the

statutory minimum since the offense involved at least five grams.  See id. § 841(b)(1)(B)(iii).

At sentencing the prosecutor told the district court that Perry had provided information

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 07‐2805 Page 2

about a fugitive coconspirator, and that the government anticipated filing a post‐sentence

motion for a reduced sentence if he was arrested and prosecuted.  See FED. R. CRIM. P. 35(b).

The government never filed a Rule 35(b) motion, so Perry, by then pro se, filed one herself

more than a year after sentencing.  The district court denied Perry’s motion because she

received the statutory minimum, the government had not moved to reduce that term, and it

was too late—so the court thought—for the government to file a motion under Rule 35(b).

Perry appeals.

Rule 35(b) authorizes a district court to reduce a sentence for substantial assistance

only “upon the government’s motion.”  FED. R. CRIM. P. 35(b)(1); see Wade v. United States,

504 U.S. 181, 185‐86 (1992).  The government must act within a year of sentencing unless the

defendant’s information was not known or did not become useful until later.  FED. R. CRIM.

P. 35(b)(2).  Here, the government has yet to file a Rule 35(b) motion for Perry’s substantial

assistance.  And Perry did not allege any breach of promise, unconstitutional motive, or bad

faith on the government’s part.  See Wade, 504 U.S. at 185‐87; United States v. Wilson, 390 F.3d

1003, 1011‐13 (7th Cir. 2004).  The district court in this case thus had no choice but to deny

Perry’s motion.

AFFIRMED.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2817 

To amend the Community Services Block Grant Act to authorize appropriations for national or regional instructional programs for low-income 

youth. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 12, 2011 

Ms. FUDGE introduced the following bill 

AUGUST 30, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Community Services Block Grant Act to authorize appropriations for national or regional instructional programs for low-income youth. 

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 ‘‘National Youth Sports 

5 Program Revitalization Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

7 Section 682(g) of the Community Services Block 

8 Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9923(g)) is amended by striking 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 2817 IH

1 ‘‘$15,000,000’’ and all that follows through ‘‘2003’’, and 

2 inserting ‘‘$20,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2012 

3 through 2022’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS