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








Exhibit 10.1


NetScout Systems, Inc.
Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation
Effective as of October 25, 2016, non-employee directors are compensated $60,000 annually for their services and do not receive any additional compensation for any regular Board meeting attended. The lead non-employee director receives an additional annual retainer of $35,000. Non-employee directors will receive $15,000 annually for serving on the Audit Committee, $10,000 annually for serving on the Compensation Committee, $6,000 annually for serving on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and $6,000 for serving on the Finance Committee. In addition, directors who are chairpersons of a particular committee are also given additional annual compensation of $15,000 for the Audit Committee, $10,000 for the Compensation Committee, $6,000 for the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and $6,000 for the Finance Committee. Non-employee directors are also reimbursed for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Board or of any committee and for attendance at approved director education programs.
Non-employee directors are also each granted annual equity-based awards in the form of restricted stock units in the amount of $140,000. These restricted stock unit awards vest 100% on the date of our annual meeting provided that during such year, such director attends at least 75%, collectively, of the meetings of the Board and any committee of the Board of which such director is a member. In the event that the foregoing attendance requirements are not met, then 100% of these restricted stock units will vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant. No other equity awards are given to our non-employee directors.
#### § 302-12.109 May we require employees to participate in counseling before listing their homes?

Yes, you may require that employees participate in counseling before listing their homes, provided this is written into your agency's relocation policy. This is a common practice in the private sector. Please note, however, that this may exclude from your homesale program any employee who lists their home before the relocation travel authorization is approved. If you choose to make this part of your agency policy, you should make a major, ongoing effort to inform as many of your potential transferees as possible of this policy.

[FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18344, Apr. 1, 2011, as amended by FTR Case 2022-05, 89 FR 12256, Feb. 16, 2024]
#### § 302-3.202 If my immediate family member and I both transfer to the same official station, may we both claim the same relocation allowances for the same non-employee family member?

No, when both you and your immediate family member transfer in the interest of the Government, you must provide your agency with the name(s) of non-employee family member(s) who will receive allowances under each of your TA. Only one of you may claim allowances for a non-employee member(s) of your immediate family (non-employee members may only be on one TA).
No. 10-10969.

#### Huber *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00397-CV

__________________

RICARDO GONZALEZ AND R&K FABRICATING INC., Appellants

V.

DAYTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 75th District Court

Liberty County, Texas

Trial Cause No. TX20105550

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ricardo Gonzalez and R&K Fabricating Inc., Appellants, filed an unopposed 

motion to dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). Appellants filed the 

motion before the appellate court issued a decision in the appeal. We grant the 

motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
2

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on April 19, 2023

Opinion Delivered April 20, 2023

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
# Comments on: 2018-2140: Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Exhibit 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANESOXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report
of Silverstar Holdings, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Clive Kabatznik, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
Officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, 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), 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.
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Clive Kabatznik                        
| | -------------------------------------------
| | Clive Kabatznik                            
| | Chief Executive Officer and                
| | Chief Financial Officer                    
| | (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
| | Date: October 3, 2006                      

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Silverstar
Holdings, Ltd. and will be retained by Silverstar Holdings, Ltd. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Comments on: 2018-2171: Sanchez v. DVA
#### § 302-4.301 Do the rates in § 302-4.300 apply if I am performing overseas tour renewal agreement travel?

No, POV mileage must not be authorized for overseas tour renewal agreement travel.
#### § 109-45.309-2.50 Hazardous property.

Hazardous property shall be made available for sale only after the review and certification requirements of § 109-43.307-2.50 of this subpart have been met.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITEDSTATES CODE,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, the Senior Vice President,Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of American Science &Engineering, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to theundersigned’s knowledge:

 

1.             theCompany’s Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (“10-Q”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               theinformation contained in the Company’s 10-Q being filed fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operation of theCompany.

 
| Date: August 11,  2008 | /s/ Kenneth J.  Galaznik                       |
|-----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                        | Kenneth J. Galaznik                                 |
|                        | Senior Vice President,  Chief Financial Officer and |
|                        | Treasurer                                           |

 

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toAmerican Science & Engineering, Inc. and will be retained byAmerican Science & Engineering, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-50750 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JAMES BLANTON CHRISTESSON, a/k/a James B. Christiansen, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-94-CR-216-2

- - - - - - - - - - June 19, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * James Blanton Christesson appeals his sentence following a jury trial conviction for conspiracy to import marihuana, importation of marihuana, conspiracy to possess marihuana, and possession with intent to distribute marihuana. He contends that the district court erred by refusing to depart downward from the guidelines sentence based on either his poor health and advancedNo. 95-50750 - 2 - age, the over-representation of his criminal history, or a combination of the factors. Because the district court acknowledged the possible reasons for departing downward, but refused to do so because it decided to follow the guidelines, the district court’s refusal to depart did not violate the law. See United States v. McKinney , 53 F.3d 664, 677 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 261, and cert denied , 116 S. Ct. 265, and cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 431 (1995); see also United States v. Madison , 990 F.2d 178, 184 (5th Cir.), cert. dismissed , 114 S. Ct. 339 (1993). AFFIRMED.
No. 11-9369.

#### Wooderts *v.*Tamez, Warden.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# Comments on: 21-1834: PAVO SOLUTIONS LLC v. KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC. [OPINION], Precedential
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 19, 2024

NO. 03-24-00094-CV

Abibou Oyeyiola, Appellant

v.

Daniel Hudsky, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION –

OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on February 1, 2024. Having 

reviewed the record, the Court holds that Abibou Oyeyiola has not prosecuted his appeal and did 

not comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal 

for want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication 

of costs is made.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

864 

CA 14-01341 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF MIGUEL DIAZ, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

V ORDER

ANTHONY ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY 

SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

WYOMING COUNTY-ATTICA LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (ADAM W. KOCH OF

COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. 

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (KATE H. NEPVEU OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County

(Michael M. Mohun, A.J.), entered June 19, 2014 in a proceeding

pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition. 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed

without costs (see Matter of Ansari v Travis, 9 AD3d 901, lv denied 3

NY3d 610).

Entered: July 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
§ 301-10.420 When may I use a taxi, TNC, innovative mobility technology company, shuttle service or other courtesy transportation? ( a ) When authorized and approved by your agency, your transportation expenses in the performance of official travel are reimbursable for the usual fare plus tip for use of a taxi, TNC, innovative mobility technology company, shuttle service or other courtesy transportation (if charges result), in the following manner: ( 1 ) *At your official station.* ( i ) From your residence or other authorized point of departure, e.g., residence to airport;
( ii ) To your residence or other authorized point of return, e.g., airport to residence;
( iii ) From your residence to your office on the day you depart the official station on official TDY that requires at least one night's lodging; or
( iv ) From your office to your residence on the day you return to the official station from an official TDY assignment that required at least one night's lodging.
( 2 ) *At your TDY location.* ( i ) From the TDY transit system station to your place of lodging or place of official business and return;
( ii ) To, from, and between your places of lodging and official business;
( iii ) Between places of official business; or
( iv ) To obtain meals at the nearest available place when the nature and location of the official business or the lodging at a TDY location are such that meals cannot be obtained there. You must attach a statement or include electronic remarks with your travel voucher explaining why such transportation was necessary.
( b ) *Courtesy transportation.* You should use courtesy transportation service furnished by hotels/motels to the maximum extent possible as a first source of transportation between a place of lodging at the TDY station and a common carrier terminal. You will be reimbursed for tips when you use courtesy transportation service.
( c ) *Restrictions.* When appropriate, your agency will restrict or place a monetary limit on the amount of reimbursement for the use of taxis, TNCs, or innovative mobility technology companies under this paragraph when— ( 1 ) Suitable Government or common carrier transportation service, including shuttle service, is available for all or part of the distance involved; or
( 2 ) Courtesy transportation service is provided by hotels/motels between the place of lodging at the TDY station and the common carrier terminal.
[FTR Amdt. 2010-02, 75 FR 24435, May 5, 2010, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2017-01, 83 FR 604, Jan. 5, 2018]
#### § 302-4.501 If I use an additional POV that was not authorized for PCS travel, will I be reimbursed for the additional POV?

No, your agency must authorize you reimbursement of the use of more than one POV before you are entitled to reimbursement.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

          - [Prohibited Transaction Exemptions 2000-25, et al.; Application Nos. D-10119 and D-10120, et al.]

# AGENCY:

Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Department of Labor (the Department).

# ACTION:

Notice of technical correction.

                    On June 1, 2000, the Department published in the                     **Federal Register**                     at 65 FR 35129 a notice of five individual exemptions in which the grant numbers were inadvertently omitted from the operative language. On page 35134, in the first paragraph under the heading “Exemption,” the individual Prohibited Transaction Exemptions (PTEs) should have been listed as follows: PTE 2000-25, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc.; PTE 2000-26, Goldman, Sachs & Co.; PTE 2000-27, The Chase Manhattan Bank; PTE 2000-28, Citigroup Inc.; and PTE 2000-29, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co.                

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Andrea W. Selvaggio or Ms. Karin Weng of the Department, telephone (202) 219-8881. (This is not a toll-free number.)

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 20th day of June, 2000.

Ivan L. Strasfeld,

Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

[FR Doc. 00-16020 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-P
Unexpended Exposed
Session Objectives

• Expand knowledge

• Provide clarification
What are Unexpended Funds?

The difference between: 

awarded, 

expended, and 

estimated expenses through program year end
Why Unexpended?

Strong funds management

Minimize funds returned to Treasury

Maximize funds in the field
What you need to know...

Accurate reporting

No restoration of funds

Timing is critical
Unexpended: Where does it go?

Competitive – offset continuations
Your responsibilities...

Understanding the request

Reporting total amounts

Accurate and timely estimates
How is done...

Review the approved amount

Review the reported amount

Determine the amount needed

Calculate the expenses

Finalize unexpended amount
Risk

- Over estimate: funds do not reach communities

- Under estimate: funds cannot be restored
Questions
# Comments on: 23-1015: In Re MORRIS [ORDER], Nonprecedential
SCWC-13-0005555 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

SIXTO MANUEL, Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant,

vs. STATE OF HAWAI # I, Respondent/Respondent-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-13-0005555; S.P.P. NO. 13-1-0018; CR. NO. 00-1-2103) ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI ( B y : R e c k t e n w a l d , C . J . , N a k a y a m a , M c K e n n a , P o l l a c k , a n d W i l s o n , J J . )

Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant’s Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed on March 30, 2015, is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, May 4, 2015. Cynthia A. Kagiwada for petitioner James M. Anderson for respondent /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-13-0005555 04-MAY-2015 08:48 AM
§ 302-3.408 What is the effect on my TCS reimbursement if my assignment lasts more than 30 months? If your assignment exceeds 30 months, your agency: ( a ) Must permanently assign you to your temporary official station or return you to your previous official station;
( b ) May not pay for extended storage or property management services incurred after the last day of the thirtieth month; and
( c ) Must pay the expenses of returning you and your immediate family and household goods to your previous official station unless you are permanently assigned to your temporary official station.
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  GROVER SELLERS A~TORNCI GINC,W. HonorableQeorgeR. Sbeppsrd **c0i3ptroim or**  **Publi0 ib300um**  **Austla, TenI**  Dear Sir:
..OphiM -~lb. o-7075 Rar Payment or pm Bond of State Tbls will acknowledgereceipt of 9, 1946, vberelnyou ask the opinion of tbl the question of vbetber the mium on the nished by a member of the Bo out of the appropziatioao? Department,under the beading as set out in SenateBill Ao. ture, 1945, quoted in part 88

to provide8'no bond premium8i 111 above referred tbo payment of the Water Bnglneers3

, Seotion 2, Revised loallyior tbe payment Board OS Water Englneer8. ;~l$ne;al'r opinion fo. O-2092,

ule that an ofrloer **or** agent-of the only suoh oompenstitlon and emoluments

of the State. McCall8 v. City of Rockdale, 112 Tex, 209, 246 9. W. 654. It iollovs that any public officer or agentvbo demands mileage, fees or expenses must polnt out some statute authorizingIts &llOVmCe. Where 8 duty requiring an expenditureof money Is Imposed upon a public **oiflcer or**  agent, and no provision le made toHonorableQeorgeB. Sheppard,page 2

defray tbe 88me, swh oifloer QC a&ent Is deemed to be repaid ior the expsnses **lnourred** In the dl8ohPrge of such duty by **vbatever** oompensatlon18 slloved snd paid to him ior hi8 serviceras **8uoh** pub110 agent. It IS thereforeapparent. that, in order for the Chlei Clerk or the Department of Agrloultureto be entitled to reimbursement for the e%psnse lnourred by hti In furnlshlngthe bond requiredby statute, there must exist sose statutory pmnislon 

## r0r the allov8noe snd paylssntor the ssme.” Blnoe there is no ~ovlsloa of tha statutes oy spscific Item la the Appro~latlon Bill, 

### oontemplatingrelmbursen.ent by the State to the **msnbers** of the Board of Wets* Bag:- Eeors for the expenses lnourredby them In furnishing t&b OffIclal Bond required br lav, you are advised that such bond prenlum cannot be regarded as a oontlngentItem of expense lavfully to be lnourredby the Departmsnt,and, therefore,suoh bond prenium may not ha paid by the Board of Water Euglneers out of Its contingentexpense

## rued.

Referenoe 1s made to Attorney Qeneral~s Oplnlons,Eos. o-2092, O-3866, O-4205 and O-3032. 

### very trulyyours

**BY -**  **~ibn&&** hbeir -

Asalstent
#### § 109-43.5000 Scope of subpart.

This subpart supplements 41 CFR part 101-43 by providing policies and procedures for the economic and efficient utilization of personal property associated with facilities placed in standby status.