alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Compensation Clawback Policy



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
 COMPENSATION CLAWBACK POLICY 
 Each executive officer shall repay or forfeit, to the
fullest extent permitted by law and as directed by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”), any annual incentive or other performance-based compensation awards (“Awards”) received by him or her on or after
January 1, 2012 if: 
  

	 	•	 	 the payment, grant or vesting of the Awards was based on the achievement of financial results that were subsequently the subject of a restatement of
the Company’s financial statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, 


  

	 	•	 	 the Board determines in its sole discretion, exercised in good faith, that the executive officer engaged in fraud or misconduct that caused or
contributed to the need for the restatement, 


  

	 	•	 	 the amount of the compensation that would have been received by the executive officer had the financial results been properly reported would have been
lower than the amount actually received, and 


  

	 	•	 	 the Board determines in its sole discretion that it is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders for the executive officer to repay or
forfeit all or any portion of the Awards. 


 The Board’s independent directors, as identified pursuant to applicable
exchange listing standards, shall have full and final authority to make all determinations under this Policy, including without limitation whether the Policy applies and if so, the amount of the Awards to be repaid or forfeited by the executive
officer. Repayment can be made from the proceeds of the sale of Company stock and the forfeiture of other outstanding awards. All determinations and decisions made by the Board’s independent directors pursuant to the provisions of this Policy
shall be final, conclusive and binding on all persons, including the Company, its affiliates, its shareholders and employees. 
 Each award
agreement or other document setting forth the terms and conditions of any annual incentive or other performance-based award granted to an executive officer shall be deemed to include the provisions of this Policy. The remedy specified in this policy
shall not be exclusive and shall be in addition to every other right or remedy at law or in equity that may be available to the Company. 
 The
Board acknowledges that this Policy will be amended if and as required to comply with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The Company shall seek to recover incentive compensation paid to any executive officer as required
by the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act or any other “clawback” provision required by law or the listing standards of the NASDAQ Global Select Market. 

As adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company on August 7, 2012.
Exhibit 32.2



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Transcend Services, Inc., certifies that to
the undersigneds knowledge, the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Transcend Services, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made
solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Mark D. Meersman   
|Mark D. Meersman       
|Chief Financial Officer
|                       
|Date: October 26, 2005
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 359.0 What does this part cover?

This part is the offering of United States Savings Bonds of Series I (referred to as Series I bonds or bonds) for sale to the people of the United States by the Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary). This offer was effective September 1, 1998, and will continue until terminated by the Secretary.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,847
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,387
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (823)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,084
<PP&E>                                         126,471
<DEPRECIATION>                                  73,333
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,383
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,682
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,460
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    87,383
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,164
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,860
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   588
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,935
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    469
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                469
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       469
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Order filed August 30, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00169-CV

____________

LAMBERT ADUMEKWE, Appellant

V.

NEW HAMPHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-81456

O R D E R

Appellant=s brief was due August 13, 2012. No brief or motion for extension of 

time has been filed. 

Unless appellant files his brief with the clerk of this court on or before September 

12, 2012, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Announcing the Global Youth Democracy Network: Fostering a New Generation of Democratic Leaders

# 									Announcing the Global Youth Democracy Network: Fostering a New Generation of Democratic Leaders							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

March 30, 2023

Integrating the voices of young people is critical to sustaining strong democracies.  Including youth perspectives into our decision-making helps foster resilient, prosperous, and secure democratic systems.  With more than half the world’s population under the age of 30, empowering and inspiring youth to serve as public servants and democratic leaders is an important vehicle for positive change.

To develop young leaders who advocate for democracy, human rights, and fundamental freedoms, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, U.S. Representative to the United Nations, announced today in Costa Rica the creation of a global Youth Democracy Network, in collaboration with the Community of Democracies.  The Network will strengthen intergenerational ties and increase peer-to-peer connections so that the next generation of leaders can work together to foster strong democracies and respect for human rights.

Young people all over the world will be invited to join the Network, interact via an online platform, learn from digital programming, and exchange perspectives.  Through an associated Youth Democracy Fellowship, we intend to provide additional opportunities for a select subset of participants, helping to develop the next generation of diverse civic leaders.  The Network’s content will be youth-driven, with the Community of Democracies’ *YouthLeads* group serving as an advisory board.

Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield announced the creation of the Youth Democracy Network during her keynote address as head of the U.S. delegation to the Summit for Democracy events co-hosted by Costa Rica, which are focused on increasing youth participation in political and democratic spaces.  The United States intends to invest seed funding to support the organization, launching, and management of this new initiative via the Community of Democracies.  Collaboration with other governments, foundations, companies, and civil society organizations will be sought in the future.

Co-founded in 2000 by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, the Community of Democracies is a global intergovernmental coalition of democratic states working together with civil society partners to promote democracy and human rights.  The United States values its participation as a member of the Community’s Governing Council and Executive Council.

For further information, please visit our website at https://www.state.gov/summit-for-democracy-2023/.

Tags

Office of the Spokesperson

Back to Top
Exhibit
3.5
  AMENDMENT
NO. 2
 TO
THE FOURTH AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
 OF
 TEPPCO
PARTNERS, L.P.


This
Amendment No. 2 (this “Amendment
No. 2”) to the Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited
Partnership of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. dated effective as of December 8, 2006 (as
amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto adopted effective as of December 27, 2007,
the “Partnership
Agreement”) is hereby adopted by Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “General
Partner”), as general partner of the Partnership.  Capitalized
terms used but not defined herein are used as defined in the Partnership
Agreement.
  WHEREAS, acting pursuant to
the power and authority granted to it under Section 15.1(d) of the
Partnership Agreement, the General Partner has determined that the following
amendment to the Partnership Agreement does not require the approval of any
Limited Partner.
 
 NOW THEREFORE, the General
Partner does hereby amend the Partnership Agreement as follows:
  Section 1. 
Sections 6.7(i) is hereby amended to read in full as follows:
  (i)
     No amendment, modification or repeal of this
Section 6.7 or any provision hereof shall in any manner terminate, reduce or
impair the right of any past, present or future Indemnitee to receive
indemnification (including expense advancement as provided by Section 6.7(b))
from the Partnership, nor the obligation of the Partnership to indemnify, or
advance the expenses of, any such Indemnitee under and in accordance with the
provisions of this Section 6.7 as in effect immediately prior to such amendment,
modification or repeal with respect to claims arising from or relating to
matters occurring, in whole or in part, prior to such amendment, modification or
repeal, regardless of when such claims may arise or be asserted.
 
 Section 2. 
Except as hereby amended, the Partnership Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.
  Section 3.  This
Amendment No. 2 shall be governed by, and interpreted in accordance with, the
laws of the State of Delaware, all rights and remedies being governed by such
laws without regard to principles of conflicts of laws.
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this
Amendment No. 2 has been executed as of November 6, 2008.
   GENERAL
      PARTNER:TEXAS
      EASTERN PRODUCTS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLCBy:   /s/ Jerry E.
      ThompsonJerry E.
      ThompsonPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>




                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
                TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Telex Communications, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ned C.
Jackson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that :

         (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
              or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (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 June 30, 2002 (the last date of
              the period covered by the Report).



/s/ Ned C. Jackson


Ned C. Jackson
Chief Executive Officer
August 9, 2002
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kwang Hui STELMACHUCK, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 97-10258.

D.C. No. CR-96-01179-HG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.1

Decided Feb. 21, 2001.

*430Before LEAYY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

1

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

MEMORANDUM2

Kwang Hui Stelmachuck appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty plea conviction to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we dismiss the appeal.

Stelmachuck argues that her sentence should be vacated because the government’s sentencing recommendation breached the written plea agreement. Whether the government violated the terms of a plea agreement is reviewed de novo. *United States v. Schuman,*127 F.3d 815, 817 (9th Cir.1997) (per curiam). But whether the facts demonstrate that there was a breach of a plea agreement is reviewed for clear error. *United States v. Salemo,*81 F.3d 1453, 1460 (9th Cir.1996). While, these two standards of review appear inconsistent, *see United States v. Johnson,*187 F.3d 1129, 1134 (9th Cir.1999), under either standard, the government did not breach the plea agreement.

The record here shows the government moved the district court to depart downward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on Stelmachuck’s substantial assistance and that the plea agreement did not require the government to take any further action. Because we find there was no breach of the plea agreement, we enforce the appeal waiver provision contained therein, *see United States v. Navarro-Botello,*912 F.2d 318, 319 (9th Cir.1990) (enforcing the knowing and voluntary waiver of the statutory right to appeal), and do not reach the merits of this contention.

Stelmachuck also raises what is essentially a challenge to the extent of the district court’s discretionary downward departure based on her acceptance of responsibility. Stelmachuck’s waiver of the right to appeal her sentence notwithstanding, it is well-established in this circuit that the extent of a district court’s discretionary downward departure is unreviewable on appeal. *United States v. Vizcarra-Angulo,*904 F.2d 22, 23 (9th Cir.1990) (stating the extent of downward departure is not reviewable on appeal). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s decision. *See Vizcarra-Angulo,*904 F.2d at 23.

DISMISSED.

2

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
henmety sind by fe Sed Chem form HH fone ay
mae Date we an NOE Rparegapt vent Se ator tat
mn te argos mrtee

there momen aoe ate eee ret mmowrnd by te es
‘sevegeneet Sevan Ba bet bn ted Wa Ore Crd
Beech Mowe Fagen

evened at Warhingen, 1.

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

HATIOMAL OCEANEC ANU ATMORMEIIC ADWINESTRATION
NATIONAL GCTAN SERVICE

AIRE CONIOUE NeTERVALS, IE MePTERS TD MAWAeUSe DEFT
DaPMLMEED eZ METER aTERVALE

Day uh whare (ob COW waren
are ante AxON MAKER
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2589 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2589

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                                 An Act

 
 To extend authorities under the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 
          1994 until December 31, 1995, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 583(a) of the Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236), as 
amended by Public Law 104-30, is amended by striking ``November 1, 
1995'' and inserting ``December 31, 1995''.
    (b) Consultation.--For purposes of any exercise of the authority 
provided in section 583(a) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) prior to November 14, 
1995, the written policy justification dated June 1, 1995, and 
submitted to the Congress in accordance with section 583(b)(1) of such 
Act, and the consultations associated with such policy justification, 
shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of section 583(b)(1) of 
such Act.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
§ 515.530 Exportation of powers of attorney or instructions relating to certain types of transactions. ( a ) The exportation to any foreign country of powers of attorney or other instruments executed or issued by any person within the United States who is not a national of a designated foreign country, which are limited to authorizations or instructions to effect transactions incident to the following, are hereby authorized upon the condition prescribed in paragraph (b) of this section: ( 1 ) The representation of the interest of such person in a decedent's estate which is being administered in a designated foreign country and the collection of the distributive share of such person in such estate;
( 2 ) The maintenance, preservation, supervision or management of any property located in a designated foreign country in which such person has an interest; and
( 3 ) The conveyance, transfer, release, sale or other disposition of any property specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section or any real estate or tangible personal property if the value thereof does not exceed the sum of $5,000 or its equivalent in foreign currency.
( b ) No instrument which authorizes the conveyance, transfer, release, sale or other disposition of any property may be exported under this section unless it contains an express stipulation that such authority may not be exercised if the value of such property exceeds the sum of $5,000 or the equivalent thereof in foreign currency.
( c ) As used in this section, the term *tangible personal property* shall not include cash, bullion, deposits, credits, securities, patents, trademarks, or copyrights.
( d ) *Certain direct financial transactions restricted.* Nothing in this section authorizes a direct financial transaction prohibited by § 515.209.
[28 FR 6974, July 9, 1963, as amended at 82 FR 52000, Nov. 9, 2017]
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 23

- 00286

- CV

In re Lauren Jane Andersen

OR I GINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Relator Lauren Jane Andersen has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining that the trial court granted the real party in interest’s motion for new trial and related orders after the court had lost plenary power. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. Because Andersen’s suit is a SAPCR governed by the Texas Family Code, we conclude that the trial court rendered judgment within the meaning of Section 101.026 when it issued its letter ruling declaring that “ the Motion for a New T rial is GRANTED ” before it lost plenary power. See Tex. Fam. Code § 101.026 ( “ ‘R ender ’ means the pronouncement by a judge of the court ’ s ruling on a matter. The pronouncement may be made orally in the presence of the court reporter or in writing, includi ng on the court ’ s docket sheet or by a separate written instrument. ”). Accordingly , we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and lift our May 17, 2023 stay order

. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8 (a)

.

____________ ______________________________ Gisela D. Triana , Justice Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis Filed: August 25, 2023
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Meredith Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the
period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Charles P. Wingard, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  May 12, 2005 |  | /s/   Charles P. Wingard
|------------------- |  | ------------------------
|                    |  | Charles P. Wingard      
|                    |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### § 401.3 Authority of District Directors of Customs to hold in custody.

District Directors of Customs are hereby authorized and designated to hold in custody awaiting appropriate disposition vessels, vehicles, and aircraft seized pursuant to the said act of August 9, 1939, and the regulations in this part.