alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SHLM-2015.02.28-EX-10.9




Exhibit 10.9




	
	
	Notice of Grant of
Performance Shares and Restricted Stock

	[Name]
[Address]
[Address]




Subject to the terms and conditions of the [Amended and Restated 2006 Incentive Plan/2010 Value Creation Rewards Plan/2014 Equity Incentive Plan] (the “Plan”), the Award Agreement, and Summary of Performance Objectives attached hereto, you have been granted an award of Performance Shares and Shares of Restricted Stock (“Awards”), as follows:
	
		
	Grant Date:
	January [__], 20[__]

	Number of Shares:
	Your Awards consist of the following:
          Performance Shares (ROIC)1
          Performance Shares (EPS)2
          Shares of Restricted Stock3 

	Vesting Schedule:
	Your Performance Shares and Shares of Restricted Stock will be subject to vesting on the third anniversary of the Grant Date

	Settlement:
	Your Awards will be settled in Shares depending on whether the terms and conditions described in the Award Agreement, the Summary of Performance Objectives, this Notice of Grant, and the Plan are satisfied






This Notice of Grant, Award Agreement and the Summary of Performance Objectives describe your Awards and the terms and conditions of your Awards.  To ensure you fully understand these terms and conditions, you should:
		
	•
	Read the Plan carefully to ensure you understand how the Plan works; and


		
	•
	Read this Notice of Grant and the corresponding Award Agreement and Summary of Performance Objectives carefully to ensure you understand the nature of your Awards and what you must do to earn it.  




You may contact [____________], Total Rewards Manager, by telephone ((330) ___-____) or email (________@us.aschulman.com) if you have any questions about your Awards or the Award Agreement.


















________________________________
1Determined by (i) multiplying $[______], the target dollar amount used to determine your total Awards for fiscal year 20[__], by 50%, (ii) dividing the result in (i) by $[_____], the average reported closing price of a Share during the 30-day period ending on the last trading day prior to the Grant Date, and (iii) multiplying the result in (ii) by 200%.  The resulting number of Shares were rounded to the nearest whole Share.
2Determined by (i) multiplying $[______], the target dollar amount used to determine your total Awards for fiscal year 20[__], by 25%, (ii) dividing the result in (i) by $[_____], the average reported closing price of a Share during the 30-day period ending on the last trading day prior to the Grant Date, and (iii) multiplying the result in (ii) by 200%.  The resulting number of Shares were rounded to the nearest whole Share.
3Determined by (i) multiplying $[______], the target dollar amount used to determine your total Awards for fiscal year 20[__], by 25%, and (ii) dividing the result in (i) by $[_____], the average reported closing price of a Share during the 30-day period ending on the last trading day prior to the Grant Date. The resulting number of Shares were rounded to the nearest whole Share.
# EUR-Lex - 31999D0848 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31999D0848

**1999/848/EC: Council Decision of 13 December 1999 on the full application of the Schengen acquis in Greece **

*
Official Journal L 327 , 21/12/1999 P. 0058 - 0058 *

COUNCIL DECISION

of 13 December 1999

on the full application of the Schengen acquis in Greece

(1999/848/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Article 2(2) of the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis into the framework of the European Union,

Having regard to the Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up the Standing Committee on the implementation of Schengen,

Having regard to the Decision adopted by the Permanent Representatives Committee on 30 June 1999 setting up the Ad Hoc Committee for Greece,

Taking into account the Decisions of the Schengen Executive Committee of 7 October 1997 (SCH/Com-ex(97)29 rev 2) and of 16 December 1998 (SCH/Com-ex(98)49 rev 3),

(1) Whereas visits have been made to check whether the requirements relating to manpower levels and material resources, the training of border control and surveillance services and coordination between the departments concerned have been satisfied;

(2) Whereas the conditions for lifting controls on persons at the internal borders with Greece as from 1 January 2000 have been met,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

Controls on persons at internal borders between Greece and the Member States which fully apply the Schengen acquis shall be lifted in the period from 1 January 2000 to 26 March 2000. This Decision shall apply from 1 January 2000 to internal maritime traffic in ports.

As regards border controls for internal flights from and to Greece, the dates for their abolition shall be agreed between Greece and any other Member State concerned as from 1 January 2000 in those airports where this is technically possible. Controls shall in any case be abolished by 26 March 2000 at the latest. The Member States concerned shall inform the Council and the Commission before 1 April 2000 of the measures they have taken to implement this Decision.

Article 2

In 2000 the Schengen Evaluation Working Party shall examine the full application of the Schengen acquis to Greece and shall study the measures that prove necessary.

Article 3

1. This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

2. It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 13 December 1999.

For the Council

The President

S. HASSI
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Kyocera Corporation
(the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2007 as amended by this Form 20/A (Amendment No. 1) (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: October 5, 2007



/s/ Masahiro UmemuraName:

Masahiro UmemuraTitle:

Vice Chairman and Representative
Director(Principal Financial Officer)
#### FLEMING, Ex Parte

Ohio Supreme Court

No 22507.

Decided Oct. 29, 1930

*693Marshall, CJ, Kinkade, Robinson, Jones, Matthias and Allen, JJ, concur.
**Exhibit 21**

**KV Pharmaceutical Company**

**Subsidiaries**

**(December 13, 2010)**

**Drugtech Corporation**

**Drugtech Sarl**

**ETHEX Corporation**

**FP 1096, Inc.**

**KV PharmaceuticalCompany Limited (UK)**

**Nesher (Nesher Israel)**

**Nesher Discovery Solutions, Inc.**

**Nesher Pharmaceuticals Inc.**

**Nesher Solutions USA, Inc. (Nesher USA)**

**MECW, LLC**

**Ther-Rx Corporation(Ther-Rx)**

**Zeratech Technologies USA, Inc.**
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Crdentia Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, James D. Durham, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for the purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



1.   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Dated:  August 8, 2003
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------


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


Each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an officer of North
American Galvanizing & Coatings, Inc. (the "Company") that the Annual Report of
the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 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 such report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of
the Company.


NORTH AMERICAN GALVANIZING & COATINGS, INC. (REGISTRANT)
--------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Ronald J. Evans
-----------------------------
Ronald J. Evans
President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)


/s/ Paul R. Chastain
-----------------------------
Paul R. Chastain
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


April 14, 2005
#### § 1917.125 Guarding temporary hazards.

Ditches, pits, excavations and surfaces in poor repair shall be guarded by readily visible barricades, rails or other equally effective means.
§ 1989.103 Filing of retaliation complaint. ( a ) *Who may file.* A person who believes that they have been discharged or otherwise retaliated against by any person in violation of TFA may file, or have filed by any person on their behalf, a complaint alleging such retaliation.
( b ) *Nature of filing.* No particular form of complaint is required. A complaint may be filed orally or in writing. Oral complaints will be reduced to writing by OSHA. If the complainant is unable to file the complaint in English, OSHA will accept the complaint in any language.
( c ) *Place of filing.* The complaint should be filed with the OSHA office responsible for enforcement activities in the geographical area where the complainant resides or was employed, but may be filed with any OSHA officer or employee. Addresses and telephone numbers for these officials are set forth in local directories and at the following internet address: *http://www.osha.gov .* Complaints may also be filed online at *https://www.osha.gov/whistleblower/WBComplaint.html .*
( d ) *Time for filing.* Within 180 days after an alleged violation of TFA occurs, any person who believes that they have been retaliated against in violation of TFA may file, or have filed by any person on their behalf, a complaint alleging such retaliation. The date of the postmark, facsimile transmittal, electronic filing or transmittal, telephone call, hand-delivery, delivery to a third-party commercial carrier, or in-person filing at an OSHA office will be considered the date of filing. The time for filing a complaint may be tolled for reasons warranted by applicable case law. For example, OSHA may consider the time for filing a complaint to be tolled if a complainant mistakenly files a complaint with an agency other than OSHA within 180 days after an alleged adverse action.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dashawn Richardson, Appellant.

[699 NYS2d 343]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J.), rendered January 7, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and conspiracy in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years and IV2 to 3 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of defendant’s guilt of each of the crimes charged, including police surveillance photographs of defendant as part of a group of individuals regularly and interchangeably engaged in street narcotics sales, defendant’s purposeful aid to a controlling member of the group in completing one particular sale to the undercover officer, and defendant’s assurance to the officer that the member of the group who had promised to fill the officer’s drug order while defendant and the officer waited would do so with “no problem” because “we’ve been doing this for years” *(see, People v McGee,*49 NY2d 48, 57-58, *cert denied sub nom. Waters v New York,*446 US 942). Furthermore, surveillance photographs depicting defendant as a member of the targeted group, combined with the undercover officer’s close-range and extended observation of defendant during the September 14, 1995 transaction, which supported the officer’s detailed description of defendant as a participant in that transaction, provided strong evidence that defendant was properly identified.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Rubin, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.
#### CARPENTER v. THE STATE.

(Decided November 21, 1916.)

Appeal from Washington Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. Ben D. Turner.

No counsel marked for appellant.

W. LV Martin, Attorney 'General, for the State.

Per curiam.

Dismissed on motion of Attorney General.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 17, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12410]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Notice of Proposals To Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or To Acquire Companies That Are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y, (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec. 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has 
determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible 
for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities 
will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all 
bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information 
Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than May 31, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Maria Villanueva, 
Consumer Regulation Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 
94105-1579:
    1. Equitable PCI Bank, Inc., Makati City, Philippines; to acquire 
PCI Express Padala, Inc., Los Angeles, California, and thereby to 
engage in money remittance activities, previously approved by Board 
Order in Norwest Corporation, 81 Federal Reserve Bulletin 1130 (1995).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 11, 2000.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-12410 Filed 5-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
```
#### Leonora Speyer, Appellant, *v.*Louis G. Hamersley, Respondent.

Argued March 24, 1937;

decided April 27, 1937.

*479
      *Eugene TJntermyer, Abraham, Shamos*and *Mitchell Salem Fisher*for appellant.

*Bartow H. Hall*and *James G. Holland*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
§ 1912.28 Contents of notice. ( a ) The notice shall give the name of the committee, and the time and place of the meeting.
( b ) The notice shall describe fully or summarize adequately the agenda.
( c ) The notice shall announce that the meeting is open to the public.
( d ) The notice shall indicate that interested persons have an opportunity to file statements in written form with the committee. The notice may specify whether the statements are to be filed before or during the meeting. ( 1 ) The chairman may permit oral statements before the committee by interested persons. In exercising his discretion in this regard, the chairman shall take into consideration the number of persons in attendance, the nature and extent of their proposed individual participation, the extent to which presentations would anticipate presentations which may be made in any rulemaking proceeding under section 6 of the Act subsequent to the recommendations of the committee, and the time, resources, and facilities available to the committee. When counsel is made available to the committee, the chairman shall consult counsel before making a decision on whether to permit oral statements. In his discretion, the chairman, upon consultation with counsel if made available to the committee, may allow or preclude the questioning of committee members or other participants.
( 2 ) The person calling the meeting may provide in the notice of the meeting that summaries of any proposed oral presentations be filed in advance of the meeting, and may allow or preclude the questioning of committee members or other participants.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

In the Interest of M.C., a child. )

___________________________________)

)

M.C., )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-4264

)

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND )

FAMILIES and GUARDIAN AD )

LITEM PROGRAM, )

)

)

Appellees. )

)

Opinion filed February 6, 2019. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota 

County; Rochelle Curley, Judge.

M.C., pro se. 

Meredith K. Hall, Appellate Counsel, 

Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, 

for Appellee Department of Children and 

Families.

Thomasina Moore, Statewide Director of 

Appeals, and Joanna Summers Brunell, 

Appellate Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee 

Guardian ad Litem Program.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
- 2 -

LaROSE, C.J., and MORRIS and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 97 (Thursday, May 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31615]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12449]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Geosciences; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 
92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Geosciences (1756).
    Date & Time: June 5-6, 2000, 8 A.M.
    Place: Room 730, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Michael Mayhew, Program Director, Education 
and Human Resources Program, Division of Earth Sciences, Room 785, 
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 306-1557.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals submitted to the 
Geoscience Education Panel, as part of the selection process for 
awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: May 12, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-12449 Filed 5-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
```
§ 23.220 Rate of pay. ( a ) *General.* The contractor must pay each worker performing work on or in connection with a covered contract no less than the applicable Executive Order minimum wage for all hours worked on or in connection with the covered contract, unless such worker is exempt under § 23.40. In determining whether a worker is performing within the scope of a covered contract, all workers who are engaged in working on or in connection with the contract, either in performing the specific services called for by its terms or in performing other duties necessary to the performance of the contract, are thus subject to the Executive Order and this part unless a specific exemption is applicable. Nothing in the Executive Order or this part shall excuse noncompliance with any applicable Federal or state prevailing wage law or any applicable law or municipal ordinance establishing a minimum wage higher than the minimum wage established under Executive Order 14026.
( b ) *Workers who receive fringe benefits.* The contractor may not discharge any part of its minimum wage obligation under the Executive Order by furnishing fringe benefits or, with respect to workers whose wages are governed by the Service Contract Act, the cash equivalent thereof.
( c ) *Tipped employees.* The contractor may satisfy the wage payment obligation to a tipped employee under the Executive Order through a combination of an hourly cash wage and a credit based on tips received by such employee pursuant to the provisions in § 23.280.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6206

ALONZO KEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GARY MAYNARD, Commissioner of South Carolina Department of Corrections; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-01-4095-1-18BC) Submitted: March 21, 2002 Decided: April 1, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alonzo Key, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Alonzo Key seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Key v. Maynard , No. CA-01-4095-1-18BC (D.S.C. Jan. 16, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED