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



EXHIBIT 10.1
 AMENDMENT NO. 2
to
AMENDED AND RESTATED
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 Amendment Company Executive
 Agreement
      (i)
    
    Executives conviction of or entrance of a plea of guilty or
nolo contendere to a felony; or(ii)
    
    fraudulent conduct by Executive in connection with the business
affairs of the Company; or(iii)
    
    theft, embezzlement, or other criminal misappropriation of
funds by Executive from the Company; or(iv)
    
    Executives bad faith refusal to (a) perform the duties of
Executive Chairman of the Board or (b) follow the lawful orders of the Board of
Directors; or(v)
    
    Executives willful misconduct, which has, or would if
generally known, materially adversely affect the goodwill, business, or
reputation of the Company; or(vi)
    
    Executives material breach of this Agreement.




---



##### 



(i)
    
    a lump sum cash payment, payable on the termination of
Executives employment, equal to the sum of (x) any accrued but unpaid base
salary as of the date of Executives termination of employment hereunder and
(y) any earned but unpaid annual incentive compensation in respect of the most
recently completed fiscal year preceding Executives termination of employment
hereunder; and(ii)
    
    such employee benefits, if any, as to which Executive may be
entitled under the employee benefit plans and arrangements of the Company.
      PACIFIC SUNWEAR OF CALIFORNIA, INC.By:Seth JohnsonChief Executive OfficerEXECUTIVEGreg H. Weaver
 2
No. P67/237.

#### Victoria Distributors, Inc. *v.*United States, protests 64/11152, 64/11165, and 64/11167 (Philadelphia).

Beckworth, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of hand-operated bicycle air pumps similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Victoria*Distributors, *Inc.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 284, C.D. 2639), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: william.nalbone@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:34:17 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

William Nalbone

Concord, NC 28027
No. 61008.

protest 222781-K (Los Angeles).

#### Adline Trading Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

*351Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with, oral stipulation of counsel that the miniature cups and saucers, item 51910 A-F, consist of decorated ehinaware, other than tableware or kitchenware or table or kitchen utensils, not containing 25 percent or more of calcined bone, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said item.
From: maxf4t@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:50:39 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Max Effort

Saint Clair Shores, MI 48081
Exhibit 3.2

Certificate of Amendment No. 1 of

the Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of

Gulfport Energy Corporation

(Pursuant to Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware)

Gulfport Energy Corporation, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the Corporation), hereby certifies as follows:

1. The name of the Corporation is Gulfport Energy Corporation.

2. Article IV of the Corporations Restated Certificate of Incorporation is hereby amended by striking the introductory sentence of
Article IV and the first sentence of paragraph (a) of Article IV in their entirety and replacing them with the following:

The Corporation is hereby authorized to issue a total of one hundred five million (105,000,000) shares of capital stock which shall be subdivided into classes as follows:

(a) One hundred million (100,000,000) shares of the Corporations capital stock shall be denominated as Common Stock, have a par
value of $0.01 per share, and have the rights, powers and preferences set forth in this paragraph.

3. The
above-referenced amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Gulfport Energy Corporation has caused this Certificate of Amendment to be executed as of October 2, 2009.



GULFPORT ENERGY CORPORATIONBy:

/s/    Mike LiddellName:

Mike LiddellOffice:

Chairman of the Board
From: carolpsalm145@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:35:52 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

carol clough

Bel Air, MD 21014
From: casc11@cox.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:02:21 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

When will government give us back our freedoms? We don't want to pay for others personal needs.

Why don't you believe in individual responsibility?

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Cas Cusimano

Gilbert, AZ 85297
No. 68116.

#### Rex Enterprises, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/30683, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chord organs and parts thereof similar in all material

*258respects to those the subject of *Excelsior Accordions, Inc.*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 148, C.D. 2828), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

September 13, 1960

No. 64509.

#### David Warsaw and W. J. Byrnes & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 329482-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of valances similar in all material respects to those the subject of *D. N.*& *E. Walter & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 26, C.D. 2098), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Open native forest (outside fog zone) 478 2.74 18.2 2,991 7.73 18.5 1,501 5.85 32.0

Closed native forest (outside fog zone) 28 0.02 6.1 1,136 1.97 16.2 702 2.26 41.9

Alien and mixed forest (outside fog zone) 256 0.67 1.3 4,833 11.69 7.2 888 3.15 33.9

Open native forest (inside fog zone) 0 – – 4,353 33.95 31.2 7,534 78.37 49.5

Closed native forest (inside fog zone) 0 – – 2,483 24.96 29.3 5,971 66.40 47.1

Alien and mixed forest (inside fog zone) 0 – – 987 3.85 21.2 1,160 10.27 54.3

Shrubland 754 8.22 37.6 9,302 127.27 62.2 2,634 11.01 68.0

Agriculture: Macadamia 0 – – 1,418 6.63 23.0 0 – –

Coffee 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Diversified 0 – – 4,516 11.52 34.4 3,153 8.06 58.5

Forest (eucalyptus) 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Fallow/Grassland 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Golf course 0 – – 68 0.18 35.3 27 0.04 53.1

Low-intensity developed 0 – – 1,697 1.41 27.9 163 0.21 55.4

High-intensity developed 0 – – 778 0.49 51.6 127 0.05 81.0

Grassland 973 23.76 5.8 8,321 36.05 29.5 3,453 12.32 56.4

Sparsely vegetated 1,496 139.35 59.1 2,350 48.82 63.5 124 0.31 71.7

Wetland vegetation 0 – – 19 0.36 30.5 3 <0.005 63.6

Water body2 0 – – 11 0.02 – 11 0.01 –

2

Recharge was not calculated using the water-budget model (see USGS SIR 2011–5078, p. 28).

1

Recharge as a percentage of water input was calculated for each subarea using the formula: [(recharge - direct recharge)/(rainfall + fog + irrigation)] x 100. Values for each subarea in a particular land-cover category were then multiplied 

by the area and summed, and that sum was then divided by the total area of that category to obtain a mean. Direct recharge is described in USGS SIR 2011–5078.

Table S-6. Estimated mean annual groundwater recharge as a percentage of water input for baseline conditions in the Southeast Mauna Loa aquifer sector of the Island of Hawai‘i, compiled by 

land-cover type and precipitation amount (refer to USGS SIR 2011–5078).

[<, less than; –, not applicable; water input is defined as the sum of mean annual rainfall, fog, and irrigation; baseline conditions are defined as 2008 land cover and mean annual rainfall for the period 1916–83; the 

Southeast Mauna Loa aquifer sector consists of the Ölaÿa, Kapäpala, Näÿälehu, and Ka Lae aquifer systems and is defined by the Hawai‘i Commission on Water Resource Management (see 

http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/cwrm/mapsillustrations/gwhu_hawaii.pdf); reported mean recharge is an area-weighted average; no distinction is made between fog and non-fog conditions for shrubland, coffee, and 

eucalyptus forest plantations]

Land-cover description

Mean annual rainfall plus fog equal to 40 

inches or less

Mean annual rainfall plus fog greater than 40 

inches and less than 80 inches

Mean annual rainfall plus fog equal to 80 

inches or greater
### Geology of Wabaunsee County, Kansas

By: Melville Rhodes MudgeRobert H. Burton

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1068

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (17294 pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **1**                            (833 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 1**                            (545 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 2**                            (11099 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 3**                            (1295 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 4**                            (795 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 7**                            (308 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 8**                            (365 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 9**                            (196 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 10**                            (530 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 11**                            (811 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 13**                            (683 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 14**                            (900 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 16**                            (102 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 18**                            (413 pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
EXHIBIT 11
                     Calculation of Weighted Average Shares
                    Outstanding for Net Income (Loss) Per Share
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                           June 30,
                                                                                    1997               1998
                                                                                -------------    --------------
<S>                                                                             <C>              <C>
Earnings:
Net Income (Loss)..........................................................     $     222,796    $   (4,188,196)
                                                                                =============    ==============

Shares:
Weighted Average Number of Common Shares
   Outstanding.............................................................         4,605,000         6,103,522
Additional Shares Under Treasury Stock Method
   from Warrants Issued 12 Months Prior to 3/31/97*........................           670,860                --
                                                                                -------------    --------------
Average Common Shares Outstanding and Equivalents..........................         5,275,860         6,103,522
                                                                                =============    ==============

Net Income (Loss) Per Share................................................     $         .04    $         (.69)
                                                                                =============    ==============
</TABLE>

* -- Calculation would be antidilutive for 1998.
From: kbennett84@frontiernet.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:17:51 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Kelly Bennett

Tremonton, UT 84337
No. 62752.

#### Men’s Hats, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 214353-K, etc. (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of straw hats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Pollak Industrial Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 251, C.D. 1991), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 13, 2017

s0110 

# Order

Clerk January 13, 2017

154040

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGA N,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 154040

COA: 323887

St. Joseph CC: 13

- 018938

- FC

ANDY JAMES BROWN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 10, 2016

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.