alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



Exhibit 11
 (1)
 2005
    
    
    2004A
    
    Net income as reported, Canadian GAAP ($ millions)
    
    $
    131.3
    
    
    $
    50.7B
    
    Items adjusting net income(2) ($ millions)
    
    $
    (9.2
    )
    
    $
    2.0C
    
    Net income, US GAAP(2) ($ millions)
    
    $
    122.1
    
    
    $
    52.7D
    
    Weighted average number of shares outstanding
    
    
    111,110,000
    
    
    
    106,686,000E
    
    Net additional shares issuable for diluted earnings per share
calculation
    
    
    3,155,000
    
    
    
    1,360,000CANADIAN GAAPBasic earnings per share (A/D)
    
    $
    1.18
    
    
    $
    0.48Diluted earnings per share (A/(D+E))
    
    $
    1.15
    
    
    $
    0.47UNITED STATES GAAP(2)Basic earnings per share (C/D)
    
    $
    1.10
    
    
    $
    0.49Diluted earnings per share (C/(D+E))
    
    $
    1.07
    
    
    $
    0.49
  (1)
 (2)
exv10w24



 





Exhibit 10.24




SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE




     This Second Amendment to Lease (this “Amendment”) is entered into effective as of the
1st day of August 2006 by and between SUMO HOLDINGS MARYLAND, LLC, a California limited
liability company (hereinafter referred to as “Landlord”) and LEET-MELBROOK, INC., a Maryland
corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Tenant”).



RECITALS




     A. On December 7, 1995, Richard L. Dietrick and Garnetta J. Dietrick (collectively referred to
as “the Dietricks”) and Tenant entered into a Lease Agreement (“Lease”) for the premises commonly
known as 18810 Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, Maryland (the “Demised Premises”).



     B. On November 8, 2001, the Dietricks assigned all of their right, title and interest in and
to the Lease to Landlord.



     C. On August 2, 2005, Landlord and Tenant amended the Lease to grant Tenant an additional
option to extend the term of the Lease for five (5) years, which option Tenant exercised.



     D. The parties now desire to further amend the Lease on the terms and conditions set forth in
this Amendment.



AGREEMENT




     NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereby amend the Lease upon the terms and subject to the conditions set
forth in this Amendment:



     1. Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings
set forth in the Lease.



     2. Section 3(a) of the Lease is hereby amended to provide that the basic annual rent for the
period from and including August 2006 through and including July 2011 shall be One Hundred
Seventy-Three Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($173,500), payable in equal monthly installments.



     3. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one instrument.



     4. Other Terms and Conditions. All other terms and conditions of the Lease, as previously
amended, will continue in full force and effect except as expressly modified in this Amendment.
The terms and conditions of the Lease, as previously amended, are incorporated into this Amendment
by reference, and the terms and conditions of this Amendment are incorporated by reference into the
Lease, as previously amended.



 









 





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment effective as of the date first
set forth above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	LANDLORD:
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	SUMO HOLDINGS MARYLAND, LLC,
	 	 	a California limited liability company
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/ Sathiyamurthy Chandramohan
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Sathiyamurthy Chandramohan
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Its:
	 	Manager
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	TENANT:
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	LEET-MELBROOK, INC.,
	 	 	a Maryland corporation
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/ Mark W. Legg
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Mark W. Legg
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Its:
	 	Chief Financial Officer







2
| (logo) Prudential

  | Prudential Asset Resources, Inc.

 

**Prudential Mortgage Capital Company**

2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500 Dallas, TX 75201

Tel 877-937-4500

  |
|---------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

Commercial Mortgage Servicing

MAC D1086

550 South Tryon Street, 14th Floor

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Attention: Asset Manager

 

 

**RE: WFCM 2015-SG1**

**Period: January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 (the"Reporting Period")**

** **

**Annual Compliance Statement**

** **

 

I, Timothy E. Steward, in my capacity as President and ManagingDirector of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. (the "Company") herebycertify with regard to the Company's role as Primary Servicer under the Poolingand Servicing Agreement, (the "Agreement") dated as of August 1, 2015pertaining to the above-referenced certificates, that:

 

(i) a review of the activities of the Company under theAgreement during the period noted above, and of the performance of the Companyunder the Agreement during the reporting period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

(ii) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, theCompany has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout thereporting period.

 

 

Effective as of 2/22/2017

 

 

/s/ Timothy E. Steward

Timothy E. Steward

President and Managing Director

Prudential Asset Resources, Inc.
exv10w23



 





Exhibit 10.23




Summary of Sprint Nextel Corporation’s 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan




     The Sprint Nextel 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2007 LTI Plan”) is a three-year program
that provides for equity-based incentive awards. A portion of the value of each participant’s
target opportunity is in the form of stock option grants and the remainder is in the form of
restricted stock unit, or RSU, awards.



     Fifty percent of the value of each participant’s targeted opportunity is in the form of stock
option grants, the number of which is based on the value of each option determined using the Black
Scholes valuation model. The exercise price of each option is the average of the high and low
price of our common stock on the grant date and the options vest ratably in three equal portions on
each of the first, second and third anniversaries of the grant date.



     The remaining fifty percent of the value of each participant’s targeted opportunity is in the
form of RSU awards(the “Primary RSU Award”), the number of
which is based on a thirty day average
of the high and low price of our common stock. In addition to the Primary RSU Award, each eligible
employee who participated in the 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, which includes each of our
executive officers other than Gary Forsee and Barry West, have received an additional RSU award (the “Additional RSU Award”) in an amount
equal to 35% of the number of shares underlying his or her Primary RSU Award. Both the Primary and
Additional RSU Awards include a performance component, which could result in the number of RSU
awards being forfeited or increased, ranging from 0% to 200% of the number of RSUs initially
awarded, based on the achievement of specified results with respect to the following performance
objectives: adjusted OIBDA margin of our core operations for 2009 and cumulative free cash flow
from operations for 2007 through 2009, each weighted 50%. All RSU awards vest on the third
anniversary of the date of the award and are eligible to receive dividend equivalent cash payments,
as and to the extent declared with respect to our common stock, following the performance period.



     The stock option grants and all RSU awards have been made pursuant to our 1997 Long-Term Stock
Incentive Program.



     Mr. Forsee’s employment agreement provides for an annual long-term performance-based incentive
opportunity with a $10 million target value for 2007. The actual incentive amounts paid under the
2007 LTI Plan will be based on our actual results in relation to the established performance
objectives, and these payments may be greater or less than the established target amounts.
3/16/2011 Page 1 of 1



### POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT Summary Page This report based on Standard Review Draft II (3/ 15/11) of the Initial Review Engineering Report.

Chemical ID: P11-0081 Reviewer: Flessner/BC

Endpoints-Assessed Table

Endpoints/Assessment Cycles 1 Releases Assessed in NCEM2? Reasons for not assessing releases

No XB Testing Required No Hazard Concern No Releases Release Below Acute Threshold 5 Release Below Chronic Threshold 5 Other

Ingestion Surface water No NA X Ground water (landfill) No NA X Consumer Use: DtD 2 No NA NA No consumer use Inhalation Air: incineration (stack) No NA X X Air: fugitive No NA X X Consumer Use: CEM 3 No NA NA No consumer use Dermal Consumer Use: CEM No NA NA No consumer use Eco Surface water: ADR conc and/or PDM 4 No NA X

Consumer Use: DtD No NA NA No consumer use

1 Assessment cycles are endpoint concentrations and dose calculations within the NCEM2 model.
2 Down-the-Drain
3 Consumer Exposure Model
4 Probabilistic Dilution Model
5 The threshold values for assessing endpoints are 1 mg/day for acute doses and 1 mg/year for chronic doses.

EAB DROP: Release information for this compound does not meet criteria for preparation of an exposure assessment in the Exposure Assessment Branch’s (EAB) Post Focus Exposure Report (this report).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-1318

CALVIN RUFFIN MALLORY, Plaintiff – Appellant,

v. DEBORAH ATKINSON, Director, VA Hospital; DR. POINDEXTER, Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cv-00139-RLW)

Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 4, 2009

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Calvin Ruffin Mallory, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Calvin Ruffin Mallory seeks to appeal the district court’s dismissal of his complaint without prejudice because Mallory failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2), which requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” and the district court’s October 4, 2002, order enjoining Mallory from filing pleadings that do not comport with certain requirements. Generally, a district court’s dismissal of a complaint without prejudice is not appealable. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that “a plaintiff may not appeal the dismissal of his complaint without prejudice unless the grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that no amendment in the complaint could cure the defects in the plaintiff’s case”) (internal quotation marks, alteration, and citation omitted). However, “if the grounds of

the dismissal make clear that no amendment could cure the defects in the plaintiff's case, the order dismissing the complaint is final in fact and appellate jurisdiction exists.”

Id . at 1066 (internal quotation marks, alteration, and citation omitted). In this case, Mallory may be able to save his action by amending his complaint to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and the district court’s October 4, 2002, order.

23 Therefore, the district court’s dismissal of Mallory’s complaint without prejudice is not an appealable final order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not air the decisional process.

DISMISSED
?

300

450

250

400

350

400

300

350

300

300

400

250

300

450

350

350

350 250

400

300

400

300

450

250

350

300

300

250 300

300

350

450

450

350

300

300

350

400

350

250

350

450

250

450

300

300

350

350

300

300

350

400

350

300

350

400

350

400

350

350

400

300

350

350

350

400

350

450

350

400

300

300

350

400

350

400

400

250

300

300

LOMA

BLANCA

RD

FM-649

FM-3167

DOGWOOD RD

SAN JULIAN RD

N EBONY

AVE

DOGWOOD RD

MAJIN

LN

POTRERO RD

CELE RD

SAN JULIAN RD

SANCHEZ RD

FM-3167

El Chapote Cr

El Chapote Cr

Saremente Cr

Las

Escobas

Cr

Del Puerto Cr

El Chapote Cr

Garcia Cem

Elizondo

Cem

Lopeño

Salineño

Roma-Los

Saenz East

Rio Grande

City North

El

Sauz

Las

Escobas

Ranch

El Chapote

Creek

Roma-Los

Saenz West

Viboras

00'

29

06

5

000

32'

29

16

32'

55'

710

11

750

30"

33

37

5 07

32

12 5

02

29

29

41

42

5

000

37

10

29

04 5

30"

52'

34

30" 02 06

35

FEET

07

5

39

FEET

29

000m

43

29

26°

40

33

30'

32

05

29

000m

29

26°

29

E

000

29

5

36

000m

29

35'

03

29

35

37'

01

29

57'

44

29

08

29

5

5

99°

29

55'

5

29

5 5

5 08

38

41

5

FEET

00'

29

29

29

860

5 5

37'

57'

03

30"

04

000

5 11

29

39

98°

09

52'

36

000m

29

42

05

38

40

5

34

30'

5

30"

35'

5

29

830

26° 30"

16

5 5

30" 5 1298°

FEET

N

26°

5 10

30"

29

01 E

N

43

09 99°

TEXAS

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

EL CHAPOTE CREEK QUADRANGLE

TEXAS-STARR CO.

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

EL CHAPOTE CREEK, TX

2012

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Imagery..................................................NAIP, April 2010

Roads..............................................©2006-2012 TomTom

Names..........................................................GNIS, 2012

Hydrography....................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2004

Boundaries....................Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2012

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 14R

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Texas Coordinate System of 1983 (south zone)

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.7

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

NQ

14R

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2012 MAGNETIC NORTH

DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 2 ́

0 MILS

5° 8 ́

91 MILS
#### § 1.471-7 Inventories of miners and manufacturers.

A taxpayer engaged in mining or manufacturing who by a single process or uniform series of processes derives a product of two or more kinds, sizes, or grades, the unit cost of which is substantially alike, and who in conformity to a recognized trade practice allocates an amount of cost to each kind, size, or grade of product, which in the aggregate will absorb the total cost of production, may, with the consent of the Commissioner, use such allocated cost as a basis for pricing inventories, provided such allocation bears a reasonable relation to the respective selling values of the different kinds, sizes, or grades of product. See section 472 as to last-in, first-out inventories.

[T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11726, Nov. 26, 1960]
IV

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 201

Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the implementation

by the Secretary of Transportation of exceptions to the train whistle

requirement of section 20153 of title 49, United States Code.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 25, 1996

Mr. LIPINSKI (for himself, Mr. RUSH, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mr. FLANAGAN, Mr. HYDE, Mr. CRANE, Mr. YATES, Mr. PORTER, Mr. WELLER,

Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. FAWELL, Mr. HASTERT, Mr. EWING, Mr. LAHOOD,

and Mr. DURBIN) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which

was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the

implementation by the Secretary of Transportation of

exceptions to the train whistle requirement of section

20153 of title 49, United States Code.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. TRAIN WHISTLE REQUIREMENT EXCEPTIONS.

4 It is the sense of the Congress that—

5 (1) in providing exceptions to the train whistle

6 requirement of section 20153 of title 49, United

7 States Code, the Secretary of Transportation should
2

HCON 201 IH

1 take into account the interests of the affected com2 munities and the past safety record at the grade

3 crossing (among other criteria); and

4 (2) whenever the Secretary determines that

5 supplementary safety measures are necessary to pro6 vide an exception to the train whistle requirement,

7 the Secretary should—

8 (A) allow as much as 3 years from the

9 date of that determination for the installation

10 of those measures; and

11 (B) work in partnership with affected com12 munities to provide technical assistance and to

13 develop a reasonable schedule for the installa14 tion of those measures.

Æ
----

Order of the President of the Court of 4 October 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-298/06) (1)

(2006/C 326/114)

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

----

(1)OJ C 237, 30.09.2006.

----
August 6, 2015 

Dear Mr. McClintock: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition 

(Docket No. FAA−2015−1814). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to process your petition. 

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) 

which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to 

proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation 

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or 

electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any 

further, we must receive the information described above by 8/5/15. If we do not receive the 

information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-4712. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst
Exhibit 11
 POTASH CORPORATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INC.

COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30
 2009
    
    2008A   Net income as reported, Canadian GAAP ($ millions)
    
    
    495.4
    
    
    
    1,471.1B   Items adjusting net income ($ millions)
    
    
    (1.1
    )
    
    
    (27.4
    )C   Net income, US GAAP ($ millions)
    
    
    494.3
    
    
    
    1,443.7D   Weighted average number of shares outstanding
    
    
    295,338,000
    
    
    
    313,138,000E   Net additional shares issuable for diluted
earnings per share calculation (Canadian GAAP)
    
    
    8,398,000
    
    
    
    10,578,000F   Net additional shares issuable for diluted
earnings per share calculation (US GAAP)
    
    
    8,398,000
    
    
    
    10,572,000CANADIAN GAAPBasic earnings per share (A/D)
    
    
    1.68
    
    
    
    4.70Diluted earnings per share (A/(D+E))
    
    
    1.63
    
    
    
    4.54UNITED STATES GAAPBasic earnings per share (C/D)
    
    
    1.67
    
    
    
    4.61Diluted earnings per share (C/(D+F))
    
    
    1.63
    
    
    
    4.46
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334

 

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made to that certainPooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2015, by and among J.P.Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., as Depositor, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Torchlight Loan Services, LLC,as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee, andPentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor with respect to CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-C33 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 of thisAgreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Servicesdo hereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.       To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilledall of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28thday of February 2019.

 

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

LeslieHayton

ManagingDirector

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
Jring treatment in so

a.Os Wis. Adrn. Code.

ame & Address—Agency/Organization I Authorize to Release Information Name - Information Maybe Released To

Organization

Address

City, State, Zip Code

pectfic Description of Records Authorized (or Release (Include dates of records, if applicable)

iS or Need for Release of Information (Be Specific)

Understandings

• This authorization is voluntary. Refusal to sign will not affect treatment, payment, enrollment or benefits eligibility except for:

No exceptions D Exceptions (specily):

• The information that I authorize to be released may be redisclosed by the recipient of the records only it allowed by law. If information is redisciosed, the

recipient ot the redisciosed information may be controlled by different laws.

• I may revoke this authorization, in writing, at any time except for information already released as a result of this authorization. The written revocation must be

given to the agency/organization I authorized to release information,

• Unless revoked, this authorization will remain in effect until the expiration time indicated below.

Choose One:

Authorization expires as of (Date).

Authorization expires month(s) from the date I sign this authorization.

EJ Authorization expires after the following action takes place:

As evidenced by my signature, I hereby authorize disclosure of records to the person(s) or agency(s) specified above.

SIGNATURE - Person Vhose Records Will be Released (Record Subject) Date Signed

E TURE -Other Person Legally Authorized to Consent to Disclosure Title or Relationship to Record Subject Date Signed