alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,854
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,529
<ALLOWANCES>                                        67
<INVENTORY>                                      2,109
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,476
<PP&E>                                           4,861
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,712
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,386
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           313
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,550
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,394
<SALES>                                          2,859
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,859
<CGS>                                            1,804
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,804
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,356
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,287)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (368)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (919)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.30)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         125,853
<SECURITIES>                                    14,538
<RECEIVABLES>                                   75,268
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,059)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               219,883
<PP&E>                                          27,823
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (9,231)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 239,202
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           57,439
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                     180,409
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   180,417
<SALES>                                        134,725
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               200,706
<CGS>                                            3,384
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  186,892
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,068)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,774
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  15
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,882
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,661
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,221
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,221
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21
        

</TABLE>
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.18    
    


 
 

DIRECTORS COMPENSATION    
    


Nonemployee
directors receive compensation for their board service. That compensation is comprised of: 



	Annual Retainer:	 	$40,000, which may be converted into deferred stock units or deferred under the Directors Stock Plan
	

Audit Committee Chair Retainer:	
 	

$20,000 annually
	

Other Committee Chair Retainer:	
 	

$5,000 annually
	

Audit Committee Member Retainer:	
 	

$5,000 annually
	

Attendance Fees:	
 	

$1,500 per board and committee meeting, plus reimbursement of reasonably incurred expenses
	

Equity Compensation:	
 	

One-time grant of 5,000 shares of restricted stock upon joining the IHS Inc. board (to be changed as of December 1, 2005 to a one-time grant of restricted stock units equal to $80,000 fair market value on the grant date), a grant of 3,000
shares of restricted stock for fiscal year 2004, a grant of 4,500 shares of restricted stock for fiscal year 2005 and annual grants of restricted stock units commencing on December 1, 2005 equal to $50,000 fair market value on the grant date
thereafter













QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.18


DIRECTORS COMPENSATION
Order filed, November 5, 2012

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00910

- CV

____________ IN THE MATTER OF H.C , Appellant

On Appeal from the 359th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Court Ca use No. 12

- 03

- 02932 JV



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due October 22, 2012

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The
record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Cherie Reegs and Darlene Forville , the court reporter s , to file the ir
record s in this appeal within thirty days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
§ 308.540 Premiums. ( a ) *Rates.* Rate Schedules for war risk facultative cargo insurance will be published by the Maritime Administrator from time to time, and may be obtained from an Underwriting Agent. All Rate Schedules are subject to change by the Maritime Administrator without notice. If no rate is published for a voyage on which war risk facultative cargo insurance is available, the Maritime Administrator will name a rate through an Underwriting Agent upon application. Whenever an applicant for war risk facultative cargo insurance receives a definite rate quotation and desires to bind insurance at the quoted rate, an order to bind the insurance in accordance with the procedure set forth in this subpart should be submitted within two business days following the day of quotation accompanied by check or Money Order payable to the order of “Maritime Administration, Department of Transportation” for the full amount of the premium thereon computed on the amount to be insured at the rate set by the Maritime Administrator, or the quotation will expire.
( b ) *Return premium.* Where goods are short-shipped, the amount of insurance may be reduced by an amount computed by applying to the original amount of insurance the proportion which the quantity of merchandise short-shipped (i.e., bales, barrels, tons, and other designations of quantity) bears to the total quantity of merchandise originally declared for insurance. Where more than one class of merchandise is insured under one policy (e.g., fuel, oil and gasoline) the reduced amount of insurance must be computed separately on each item. Where the amount of insurance is reduced, the Maritime Administrator will give consideration to requests for proportionate returns of premium. An application for the return of a premium must be submitted to the Underwriting Agent in quadruplicate on Form MA-317, prescribed in § 308.547.
Pursuant to 5

TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________________

No. 99-50572 

__________________________

SYLVIE M., by next friend Diane R.;

Diane R.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants

versus

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF DRIPPING SPRINGS

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; ET AL

Defendants

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF DRIPPING SPRINGS

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(A-97-CV-314)

___________________________________________________

May 05, 2000

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiffs-Appellants Sylvie M. and Diane R. (collectively,

“Appellants”) ask us to reverse the district court’s reversal of

the State Education Hearing Officer’s decision that the defendantappellee (“School District”) did not provide a free appropriate

public education (“FAPE”), and to reverse both the Hearing

Officer’s and the district court’s rulings that Appellants are not

entitled to reimbursement for residential placement of Sylvie at

the Elan School because it was not appropriate for her disability.
2

Appellants’ claims are grounded, alternatively, in the Individuals

with Disability in Education Act (“IDEA”) and the Rehabilitation

Act. We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Appellants’

actions.

After carefully reviewing the material facts at issue in this

case, as reflected by the record and as related in briefs of

counsel, and applying the appropriate law to those facts, we

conclude that the district court did not commit reversible error in

holding, under the appropriate “essentially de novo” standard of

review, that the Individual Educational Plan (“IEP”) provided by

the school district was in compliance with the appropriate

procedures and was reasonably calculated to enable Sylvie to

receive educational benefits. Neither do we find reversible error

in the district court’s determination that Sylvie’s unilateral

residential school placement by her parents was inappropriate and

thus not reimbursable. See Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School

District v. Michael F., 118 F.3d 245 (5th Cir. 1997); see also

Houston Independent School District v. Bobby R., 200 F.3d 341 (5th

Cir. 2000). 

We conclude that the arguments advanced on behalf of

Appellants are insufficient to justify reversal of the district

court’s judgment, which, in all respects, is

AFFIRMED.
§ 307.5 Provisions of general applicability. ( a ) The following operators must comply with the reporting requirements contained in this part: ( 1 ) Operators of United States-flag vessels of one thousand gross tons or more, operating in the foreign commerce of the United States.
( 2 ) Operators of foreign-flag vessels of one thousand gross tons, or more, for which an Interim War Risk Insurance Binder has been issued under the provisions of Title XII, Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 1281 *et seq.*).
( b ) Operators of other merchant vessels may choose to submit reports and have voyage information forwarded to MARAD, when approved by the Coast Guard and MARAD. Information voluntarily provided by them will be released by Coast Guard only for safety purposes or to satisfy certain advance notification requirements of 33 CFR part 160. Requests should be addressed to the Maritime Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, Attn: MAR-742.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE NETSOLVE
INCORPORATED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (UNAUDITED) FOR SEPTEMBER 30,
1999 AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME (UNAUDITED) FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,655
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,462
<ALLOWANCES>                                       252
<INVENTORY>                                        278
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,989
<PP&E>                                           8,024
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,355
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,690
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,401
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           135
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,527
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,690
<SALES>                                         18,368
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,313
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,448
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  66
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,684
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (2,206)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,890
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,630
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22


</TABLE>
§ 327.45 Contents of a claim. ( a ) A properly filed claim shall include the following, however, any of the following requirements may be waived by the Maritime Administration: ( 1 ) Identification of the Maritime Administration as the agency whose act or omission gave rise to the claim;
( 2 ) The full name and mailing address of the claimant. If this mailing address is not claimant's residence, the claimant shall also include residence address;
( 3 ) The date, time, and place of the incident giving rise to the claim;
( 4 ) The amount claimed, in a sum certain, supported by independent evidence of property damage or loss, personal injury, or death, as applicable together with supporting medical records and a HIPPA compliant medical waiver for each treating physician, hospital, or medical provider;
( 5 ) A detailed description of the incident giving rise to the claim and the factual basis upon which it is claimed the United States is liable for the claim;
( 6 ) A description of any property damage or loss, including the identity of the owner, if other than the claimant, as applicable;
( 7 ) The nature and extent of the injury, as applicable;
( 8 ) The full name, title, if any, and address of any witness to the incident and a brief statement of the witness' knowledge of the incident;
( 9 ) A description of any insurance carried by the claimant or owner of the property and the status of any insurance claim arising from the incident; and
( 10 ) An agreement by the claimant to accept the total amount claimed in full satisfaction and final settlement of the claim, lien, or subrogation claim on the claimed amount, or any assignment of the claim.
( b ) A claimant or duly authorized agent or legal representative must sign in ink a claim and any amendment to that claim. The claim shall include a statement that the information provided is true and correct to the best of the claimant's knowledge, information, and belief. If the person's signature does not include the first name, middle initial, if any, and surname, that information must be included in the claim. A married woman must sign her claim in her given name, *e.g.,* “Mary A. Doe,” rather than “Mrs. John Doe.”
§ 159.005-15 Approval of equipment or material: Suspensions, withdrawals, and terminations. ( a ) The Commandant suspends an approval issued under this subchapter in accordance with § 2.75-40 of this chapter, withdraws an approval issued under this subchapter in accordance with § 2.75-50(a) of this chapter, and terminates an approval issued under this subchapter in accordance with § 2.75-50(b) of this chapter.
( b ) [Reserved]
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32000-32001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12613]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8333]

Determination and Certification Under Section 40A of the Arms 
Export Control Act

    Pursuant to section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 
2781), and Executive Order 13637, as amended, I hereby determine and 
certify to the Congress that the following countries are not 
cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts:

Cuba
Eritrea
Iran
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North Korea)
Syria
Venezuela

    This determination and certification shall be transmitted to the 
Congress and published in the Federal Register.

[[Page 32001]]

    Dated: May 10, 2013.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-12613 Filed 5-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
#### § 201.123 Standards for issuance of subpoena duces tecum.

The officer considering any application for a subpoena duces tecum shall issue the subpoena requested if he is satisfied the application complies with this section and the request is not unreasonable, oppressive, excessive in scope or unduly burdensome. No attempt shall be made to determine the admissibility of evidence in passing upon an application for a subpoena duces tecum and no detailed or burdensome showing shall be required as a condition to the issuance of any subpoena.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-41352

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANCISCO NOE VILLELA-RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:16-CR-605-1

Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Francisco Noe 

Villela-Ramirez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in 

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States 

v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Villela-Ramirez has not filed a 

response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 20, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-41352 Document: 00514040109 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/20/2017
No. 16-41352

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-41352 Document: 00514040109 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/20/2017
#### § 298.26 Lease payments.

You must obtain our approval of the amount and conditions of lease or charter hire payments if the payment of principal and interest on Obligations would be dependent, in any way, upon the lease or charter hire payments for a Vessel or Shipyard Project.
#### Maranville Ditch Company et al., appellants, v. Kilpatrick Brothers Company, appellee.

Filed November 17, 1916.

No. 18954.

Waters: Irrigation: Appropriation: Adverse User. To the extent that a landowner, under a prior appropriation, uses water of a river for irrigation when actually needed, diversions hy upper appropriators using water for the same purpose are not adverse.

Appeal from the district court for Chase county: Ernest B. Perry, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*P. W. Scott,*for appellants.

*Hazlett & Jack*and *Charles W. Meeker, contra.*

Rose, J.

Plaintiffs brought this suit in equity in the district court for Chase county to protect alleged priority of rights to the use of waters of the Frenchman river for irrigation. The statutory appropriations of the parties are as follows: Defendant, December 23, 1890, 64.86 cubic feet of water a second; plaintiff Maranville Ditch Company, Decembers, 1894, 6 cubic feet of water a second; plaintiff Inman Ditch Company, February 28, 1895, 6.43 cubic feet of water a second. Plaintiffs are upper proprietors. They assert prior rights alleged to have been acquired by prescription or by adverse user for more than the statutory period of ten years. The district court decreed that defendant had a prior right to use 24 cubic feet of water a second. Plaintiffs have appealed.

It is contended that the evidence does not justify the finding below! There is testimony tending to show that by means of two dams, two and five miles, respectively, above defendant’s headgate, plaintiffs have for more than ten years diverted to their irrigation ditches the entire flow of the river at those places. Owing to the peculiar nature of the basin of the stream, however, the river, be*372fore reaching defendant’s headgate, accumulated considerable water which defendant used for irrigation. Defendant owns 2,000 acres of land under its ditch. One of its officers testified that it annually irrigated from 1,50Q to 2,000 acres of its own, in addition to 160 acres which .it did not own. To the extent that defendant, under its prior appropriation, used water, when actually needed for irrigation, the diversions of plaintiffs were not adverse. 2 Kinney, Irrigation and Water Rights (2d ed.) sec. 1050; *Faulkner v. Rondoni,*104 Cal. 140; *Talbott v. Butte City Water Co.,*29 Mont. 17; *Featherman v. Hennessy,*42 Mont. 535; *Davis v. Chamberlain,*51 Or. 304; *Henderson v. Goforth,*34 S. Dak. 441. Under these circumstances plaintiffs were required to prove that they had deprived defendant of the use of a definite quantity of water to which it was entitled under its prior appropriation. *Hayes v. Silver Creek & Panoche Land & Water Co.,*136 Cal. 238; *Logan v. Guichard,*159 Cal. 592. In this situation the trial court found that, while the testimony was not as certain, unequivocal and definite as it should have been, defendant had irrigated annually approximately 1,680 acres, a use of water, according to the statute, equivalent to 24 cubic feet a second. The finding on appeal is the same. This conclusion makes it unnecessary to consider other questions argued.

Affirmed.

Sedgwick and Hamer, JJ., not sitting. •