alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exhibit10-3_1109.htm


     

    EXHIBIT
10.3

     

     

    

     

    
      
        [Date]



      


      [Name of
Grantee]:

      


      At the
direction of the Performance Compensation Subcommittee (the "Committee") of the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company, you are hereby
notified that the Committee has granted you a non-qualified stock option (the
"Option") pursuant to the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan as adopted by the Company
and as in effect on the date of the grant (the "Plan").

      


      This
Option entitles you to purchase [Number of Stock Options Granted] shares of
Common Stock of the Company at the price of $__.__ per share which is payable in
cash or by check in United States Dollars, Common Shares of the Company, or
other property acceptable to the Committee.  The date of grant of this
Option is ________ __, 20__, and it is the determination of the Committee that
on that date the fair market value of the Company's Common Shares was $__.__ per
share.  The Option must be exercised, if at all, on or before ________
__, 20__.  One-third (1/3) of the shares represented by this Option
shall become exercisable on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of
the grant.  The Option may not be exercised for fractional
shares.

      


      The
Option is subject to the terms, conditions and restrictions of the Plan as in
effect on the date of the grant.  Copies of the Plan and current
prospectus are enclosed.  At the time or times you wish to exercise
this Option in whole or in part, please refer to this letter and the provisions
of the Plan dealing with methods and formalities of exercising your
option.

      


      By not
rejecting this award as described below, you are consenting to the electronic
delivery of prospectuses, annual reports and other information required to be
delivered by Securities and Exchange Commission rules.  You may revoke
this consent in writing at any time upon three business days’ notice to the
Company, in which case subsequent prospectuses, annual reports and other
information will be delivered to you in hard copy.

      


      If for
any reason, you do not wish to receive the award and elect instead to have it
irrevocably cancelled, contact ______ ______ (___-___-____,
______.______@___________.___) to request a rejection form, which you may
complete and fax back no later than ________ __, 20__.  If you choose
to submit a rejection form, the rejection is irrevocable.  If you have
any questions regarding this stock option grant, please feel free to contact
me.

      


      Sincerely,

      


      WENDY'S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC.

      


      


      


      Roland C.
Smith

      Chief
Executive Officer
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

|                                                              |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                              | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services Home |
|                                                              |

The application package in  will be available in IDEA Parts B and C State Formula Grant Application Forms, Grant Award Letters, Funding Tables and Other Information.

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - Higher Education Rulemaking
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Elevating Teaching
          - Early Learning
          - Engage Every Student
          - Unlocking Career Success
          - Cybersecurity

 

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
          - vote.gov
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-08-361   0004-383-0        -000-CV

JOHNNY WILLIAMSON ANDChHaArRlLeEsS E. McCKiInNsStTrRyY	APPELLANTS	

SHAYLYN WILLIAMSON

	V.

FIRST TEXAS HOMES, INC. D/B/AChHaArRlLeEsS VeEsSsS	APPELLEES

GALLERY CUSTOM HOMES D/B/A

FIRST TEXAS CUSTOM HOMES

	----------

	FROM COUNTY THE 393RD        DISTRICT COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT  DENTON          COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	On  jANUARYJanuary 22, 2009              ,  June 2, 2005, we notified appellant[s] that [his brief /her/theirtheir] brief had not been filed as required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a).  TEX. R. APP. P.Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a).  We stated we wCcould dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant [s]s or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court within ten days a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal..  See TTex. Ru. App. P. 42.3.    We have not received any response.

	Because appellant’s [s’]’ brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.  See TEX. R. APP. P.Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

	Appellant[s] shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

								PER CURIAM 		

PANEL D:	 :  CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ.  R MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MEIREER, J.

DELIVERED:     June 30, 2005 February 1029, 2009
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Uranium-bearingnickel-cobalt-native silver deposits, Black Hawk District, Grant County, NewMexico**
 
Report | Plates: 141516
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:1009-K
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000963055
 
August 27, 2018
#### 4.1801 Definitions.

As used in this part—

*Highest-level owner* means the entity that owns or controls an immediate owner of the offeror, or that owns or controls one or more entities that control an immediate owner of the offeror. No entity owns or exercises control of the highest level owner.

*Immediate owner* means an entity, other than the offeror, that has direct control of the offeror. Indicators of control include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: ownership or interlocking management, identity of interests among family members, shared facilities and equipment, and the common use of employees.

[79 FR 31190, May 30, 2014, as amended at 81 FR 45866, July 14, 2016; 84 FR 19841, May 6, 2019; 85 FR 40063, July 2, 2020]
436.602-4 Selection authority. ( a ) The HCA shall serve as the selection authority in accordance with FAR 36.602-4. The HCA may authorize an acquisition official above the level of the contracting officer to serve as the selection authority.
( b ) A copy of the final selection, inclusive of the supporting documents, shall be provided to the contracting officer and maintained in the solicitation file.
# C_2021190EN.01000301.xml

| 18.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

17 May 2021

(2021/C 190/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2143 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,60 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4363 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86215 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,1552 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0950 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 151,10 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,0665 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,498 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 352,90 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5428 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9259 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 10,1660 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5683 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4720 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,4318 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6879 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6230 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 382,18 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,2064 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8226 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5164 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 17 422,72 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0160 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,201 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 89,9493 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,214 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,4365 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 24,1677 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 89,0282 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2143

JPY

Japanese yen

132,60

DKK

Danish krone

7,4363

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86215

SEK

Swedish krona

10,1552

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0950

ISK

Iceland króna

151,10

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,0665

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,498

HUF

Hungarian forint

352,90

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5428

RON

Romanian leu

4,9259

TRY

Turkish lira

10,1660

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5683

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4720

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,4318

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6879

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6230

KRW

South Korean won

1 382,18

ZAR

South African rand

17,2064

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8226

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5164

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

17 422,72

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0160

PHP

Philippine peso

58,201

RUB

Russian rouble

89,9493

THB

Thai baht

38,214

BRL

Brazilian real

6,4365

MXN

Mexican peso

24,1677

INR

Indian rupee

89,0282

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
PUBLIC LAW 114–66—OCT. 7, 2015 129 STAT. 553 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 994: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015): 

May 11, considered and passed Senate. 

Sept. 24, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–66 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1 Walter 

Hammond Place in Waldwick, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Joseph 

D’Augustine Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT JOSEPH D’AUGUSTINE POST OFFICE 

BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1 Walter Hammond Place in Waldwick, New 

Jersey, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Joseph 

D’Augustine Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Joseph D’Augustine Post Office Building’’. 

Approved October 7, 2015. 

Oct. 7, 2015 

[S. 994] 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with PUBLAW
H. J. Res. 42 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-three 

Joint Resolution 

Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress disapproves of the action of the District of Columbia Council 

described as follows: The Comprehensive Policing and Justice 

Reform Amendment Act of 2022 (D.C. Act 24–781), enacted by 

the Council of the District of Columbia on January 19, 2023, and 

transmitted to Congress pursuant to section 602(c)(1) of the District 

of Columbia Home Rule Act on January 26, 2023. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
436.603 Collecting data on and appraising firms' qualifications. ( a ) HCA's which require architect-engineer services shall establish procedures to comply with the requirements of FAR 36.603.
( b ) The procedures shall include a list of names, addresses, and phone numbers of offices or boards assigned to maintain architect-engineer qualification data files. The list shall be updated annually.
42.705-2 Auditor determination procedure. ( a ) *Applicability and responsibility.* ( 1 ) The cognizant Government auditor shall establish final indirect cost rates for business units not covered in 42.705-1(a).
( 2 ) In addition, auditor determination may be used for business units that are covered in 42.705-1(a) when the contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) and auditor agree that the indirect costs can be settled with little difficulty and any of the following circumstances apply: ( i ) The business unit has primarily fixed-price contracts, with only minor involvement in cost-reimbursement contracts.
( ii ) The administrative cost of contracting officer determination would exceed the expected benefits.
( iii ) The business unit does not have a history of disputes and there are few cost problems.
( iv ) The contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) and auditor agree that special circumstances require auditor determination.
( b ) *Procedures.* ( 1 ) The contractor shall submit to the cognizant contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) and auditor a final indirect cost rate proposal in accordance with 42.705-1(b)(1).
( 2 ) Once a proposal has been determined to be adequate for audit in support of negotiating final indirect cost rates, the auditor shall— ( i ) Audit the proposal and prepare an advisory audit report, including a listing of any relevant advance agreements or restrictive terms of specific contracts;
( ii ) Seek agreement on indirect costs with the contractor;
( iii ) Prepare an indirect cost rate agreement conforming to the requirements of the contracts. The agreement shall be signed by the contractor and the auditor;
( iv ) If agreement with the contractor is not reached, forward the audit report to the contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) identified in the Directory of Contract Administration Services Components (see 42.203), who will then resolve the disagreement; and
( v ) Distribute resulting documents in accordance with 42.706.
[48 FR 42370, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 59 FR 67052, Dec. 28, 1994; 62 FR 51258, Sept. 30, 1997; 63 FR 9065, Feb. 23, 1998; 76 FR 31408, May 31, 2011]
#### 430.201 Contract requirements.
- Name
      - **Julia Martin Eile**
      - Address
      -  U.S. Department of Education, OSERS400 Maryland Ave., SW,  PCP 5146Washington, DC 20202  
      - Email
      - Julia.Martin.Eile@ed.gov
      - Telephone
      - 202-245-7431
      - TDD
      - If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
# C_2017444EN.01000301.xml

| 23.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 444/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 444/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

22 December 2017

(2017/C 444/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1853 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 134,37 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4443 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88568 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,9327 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1735 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,8963 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,750 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 311,82 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1975 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6420 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,5250 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5358 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5057 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,2648 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6904 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5929 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 276,34 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,0586 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7945 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5420 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 070,50 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8354 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,382 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 69,0950 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,830 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,9349 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,1255 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,9065 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1853

JPY

Japanese yen

134,37

DKK

Danish krone

7,4443

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88568

SEK

Swedish krona

9,9327

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1735

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,8963

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,750

HUF

Hungarian forint

311,82

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1975

RON

Romanian leu

4,6420

TRY

Turkish lira

4,5250

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5358

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5057

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,2648

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6904

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5929

KRW

South Korean won

1 276,34

ZAR

South African rand

15,0586

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7945

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5420

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 070,50

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8354

PHP

Philippine peso

59,382

RUB

Russian rouble

69,0950

THB

Thai baht

38,830

BRL

Brazilian real

3,9349

MXN

Mexican peso

23,1255

INR

Indian rupee

75,9065

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00050

- CV

YOLANDA SUMMERS APPELLANT

V.

WARREN PROP. INC. D/ B/A

WARRENT TERRACE APTS

. APPELLEE

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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



### MEMORAN DUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered appellant 's “ Formal Motion To Withdraw /Dismiss

Appeal.” It is the court ’ s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we

dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

PANEL: MEIER, J.; LI VINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.

DELIVERED: April 3, 2014
#### 305.7004 Publicizing postaward.

Notices of contract actions exceeding $25,000, funded in whole or in part by the PPHF, shall be identified on HHS' PPHF Web site at *http://www.hhs.gov/open/prevention/index.html* no later than 5 days after the contract action occurs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CENTEX
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.'S JUNE 30, 1998, FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000818764
<NAME> CENTEX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             878
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,793
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     68,205
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                              30
<DEPRECIATION>                                       5
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  78,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           500
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,830
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    78,514
<SALES>                                          6,076
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,076
<CGS>                                            6,269
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,269
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (193)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (193)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (193)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
#### CUNNINGHAM v. NILSON.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

November 6, 1903.)

L Appeal—New Tbial—Law op Case.

Where, on a former appeal, it was held on reversal that the evidence presented a question of fact for the jury, and on the retrial the judge, sitting in place of a jury, decided in favor of defendant on substantially the same state of facts, his decision will not be disturbed on appeal.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Eighth District.

Action by Mary Cunningham against Eric Nilson. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and BISCHOFF and BLANCHARD, JJ.

Kneeland, La Fetra & Glaze, for appellant.

John E. Duffy, for respondent.

FREEDMAN, P. J.

Upon a former appeal in this case (84 N. Y. Supp. 668) it was held that the evidence presented a question of fact which should have been presented to the jury. Substantially the same state of facts were shown upon the trial from which the present appeal comes up, and the trial judge,, sitting in place of a jury, has decided in favor of the defendant. The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.