alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.5
                                                                    ------------

                    SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULE OF DIRECTORS AND
                     EXECUTIVE OFFICERS WHO ARE PARTIES TO
                         AN INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT




Signatory                                  Capacity
---------                                  --------

Eugene M. Freedman                         Director

E. Gordon Gee                              Director

Kenneth B. Gilman                          Director and Executive Officer

V. Ann Hailey                              Executive Officer

Arnold F. Kanarick                         Executive Officer

David T. Kollat                            Director

Claudine Malone                            Director

Leonard A. Schlesinger                     Director

Donald B. Shackelford                      Director

Allan R. Tessler                           Director

Martin Trust                               Director and Executive Officer

Abigail S. Wexner                          Director

Leslie H. Wexner                           Director and Executive Officer

Raymond Zimmerman                          Director
# C_2017357EN.01001001.xml

| 23.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 357/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 357/10

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2017 — AlzChem v Commission

(Case T-451/15) (1)

1

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for reviewing State aid - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination - Overriding public interest))

(2017/C 357/12)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: AlzChem AG (Trostberg, Germany) (represented: initially by A. Borsos and J. Guerrero-Pérez, and subsequently by A. Borsos, J. Guerrero-Pérez and I. Georgiopoulos, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Buchet, M. Konstantinidis and L. Armati, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of the Commission decision of 26 May 2015 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to a procedure for reviewing State aid.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders AlzChem AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders AlzChem AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.

1

---
(a) A review of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation’s activities and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of March 2, 2016 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”), among Toyota Auto Finance Receivables LLC, as seller, Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, as servicer (in such capacity, the “Servicer”) and sponsor, and Toyota Auto Receivables 2016-A Owner Trust, as issuer, during the period from March 2, 2016 to December 31, 2016 has been made under my supervision.
  (b)  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the aforementioned period.
 
  
 By: /s/ Wei Shi
Before the First Division,

January 9, 1939

No. 40340.

#### Protest 867200-G of Nippon Trading Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of eabinets similar to those the subject of Abstract 37636. The claim at 33)4 percent under paragraph 412 was therefore sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         118,394
<SECURITIES>                                 3,788,981
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,991,229
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,308,406
<PP&E>                                     102,046,352
<DEPRECIATION>                              32,728,006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              88,626,752
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,488,796
<BONDS>                                     53,338,850
<COMMON>                                       183,430
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,045,580
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                88,626,752
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,449,897
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,145,203
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,643
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,791,389
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                297,051
<INCOME-TAX>                                   118,829
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            178,222
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   178,222
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.98


</TABLE>
```

[106th Congress Public Law 333]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ333.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 1307]]

Public Law 106-333
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 919 West 34th Street in Baltimore, Maryland, as the ``Samuel H. Lacy, 
   Sr. Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Oct. 19, 2000 -  [H.R. 4447]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 919 West 
34th Street in Baltimore, Maryland, shall be known and designated as the 
``Samuel H. Lacy, Sr. Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Samuel H. Lacy, Sr. Post 
Office Building''.

    Approved October 19, 2000.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4447:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):
            July 11, 12, considered and passed House.
            Oct. 6, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
# C_2016027EN.01001301.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 2 November 2015 — F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG v Accord Healthcare OÜ

(Case C-572/15)

(2016/C 027/16)

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG

Applicant:

Defendant: Accord Healthcare OÜ

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1) | Must Article 21(2) of Regulation No 469/2009 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified version) be interpreted as shortening the duration of a supplementary protection certificate issued in a Member State which was issued under national law before the accession of the State in question to the European Union and whose duration in relation to an active substance, as stated in the supplementary protection certificate, would be longer than 15 years from the time when the first marketing authorisation in the Union was granted for a medicinal product consisting of the active substance or containing it? |
| --- | --- |

1)

Must Article 21(2) of Regulation No 469/2009 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified version) be interpreted as shortening the duration of a supplementary protection certificate issued in a Member State which was issued under national law before the accession of the State in question to the European Union and whose duration in relation to an active substance, as stated in the supplementary protection certificate, would be longer than 15 years from the time when the first marketing authorisation in the Union was granted for a medicinal product consisting of the active substance or containing it?

1

| 2) | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is Article 21(2) of Regulation No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified version) compatible with EU law, in particular the general principles of EU law on the protection of acquired rights, the principle of the prohibition of retroactive effect of law, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

2)

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is Article 21(2) of Regulation No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified version) compatible with EU law, in particular the general principles of EU law on the protection of acquired rights, the principle of the prohibition of retroactive effect of law, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

---

(1)  OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1.

1

---
Alfalfa 

 Alfalfa is a popular legume due to its high quality, yield, and summer growth. 

However, alfalfa requires better soils and management to capture its benefits. 

3⁄4 Perennial legume 

3⁄4 Erect with leafy stems from large crowns at the soil surface 

3⁄4 Generally used for hay and silage but increasing use in pastures 

3⁄4 Withstands drought better than other legumes due to a deep taproot 

3⁄4 Grows well with orchardgrass 

3⁄4 In pure stands can cause bloat 

3⁄4 Prone to a number of disease and insect problems 

3⁄4 Should only be used on well drained fertile soils 

 Characteristics of alfalfa – note increased stemminess close to the ground 

Generalized growth curve for alfalfa – varies with location 

Source for graphics and photos: A Guide to the Common Forages and Weeds of 

Pastures, MU Extension, University of Missouri - Columbia 

Grazing Guide Sheet # 6 January 2005 
Page 2 - Alfalfa 

Establishment: Must pay attention to detail 

pH: 6.5-7.0 

Soil: deep, well drained, fertile soils 

Fertility at planting: No N; P and K per soil test 

Inoculation: essential – use commercial inoculants 

Date: 30-60 days < first killing frost in fall or 30 days < last killing frost in spring 

Rate: 15-25 lbs/A for pure stands; 10-20 lbs/A with 3-5 lbs/A of orchardgrass 

Method: 6-8” rows; cultipacker-seeder is the best planter in prepared seedbeds 

Conventional seeding: seed 1/4-1/2” deep preferably with a cultipacker 

A firm and compact seedbed is essential 

No-till seeding: graze or mow the sod short; kill all vegetative competition with a 

herbicide, use insecticide, plant 1/4-1/2” deep with no till 

Not suited for frost seeding due to weak seedling vigor 

Management: requires a high level of management 

to capture benefits 

Hay: 4 to 7 cuttings per year (depends on location and management) 

Harvest at early bloom stage for compromise between quality and yield 

Fertility: use a soil test to replace nutrients removed with hay; maintain pH 

Grazing: rotationally graze for 1-7 days at a time; rest for 25-40 days at a time; 

Use grazing tolerant varieties 

IMPORTANT: Avoid bloat by 

3⁄4 seeding with grass 

3⁄4 turning cattle into new paddock only after forage is dry (no dew) 

3⁄4 not allowing cattle to get hungry prior to turn in 

Approximate yield: 3-6 tons when well managed and adapted to location 

Stand life: 3-5 yrs, up to 8 yrs with good management and adapted to location 

In coastal plain, shorter stand life (2 to 4 yrs) 

Relationship between the stage of alfalfa maturity at harvest to total digestible 

nutrients (TDN), crude protein (CP), and acid detergent fiber (ADF) on a dry

matter basis 

Maturity TDN% CP% ADF%

Pre-bud 65 21.7 28 

Bud 62 19.9 31 

1/10 bloom 58 17.2 34 

1⁄2 bloom 56 16.0 38 

Full bloom 54 15.0 40 

Mature 52 13.6 42 

From Alfalfa in the South Source: Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 

1978, National Academy of Science, Publ. 1349 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer

Grazing Guide Sheet # 6 January 2005
# C_2015178EN.01002501.xml

| 1.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/25

---

Action brought on 23 February 2015 — ZZ v EESC

(Case F-33/15)

(2015/C 178/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: J.-N. Louis, N. de Montigny and D. Verbeke, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the implied decision of the Appointing Authority to not take measures for compliance with the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 26 February 2013 in Case F-124/10 Labiri v EESC and the claim for damages for the non-pecuniary harm allegedly suffered.

Labiri

EESC

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the implied rejection decision of 20 February 2015 opposing the applicant’s complaint directed against the wrongful failure of the Appointing Authority to take the measures for compliance with the judgment of 26 February 2013 in Case F-124/10; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the implied rejection decision of 20 February 2015 opposing the applicant’s complaint directed against the wrongful failure of the Appointing Authority to take the measures for compliance with the judgment of 26 February 2013 in Case F-124/10;

| — | Order the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) to pay the applicant, as non-pecuniary damages, the sum of EUR 50,00 per day from 14 December 2007 until the date that the assistance measures described in the letter of 27 May 2010 from the Secretary General of the Committee of the Regions are implemented and EUR 100,00 per day as of 26 February 2013 until the date of the adoption of measures to comply with the Civil Service Tribunal’s judgment; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) to pay the applicant, as non-pecuniary damages, the sum of EUR 50,00 per day from 14 December 2007 until the date that the assistance measures described in the letter of 27 May 2010 from the Secretary General of the Committee of the Regions are implemented and EUR 100,00 per day as of 26 February 2013 until the date of the adoption of measures to comply with the Civil Service Tribunal’s judgment;

| — | Order the EESC to pay the applicant default interest on those amounts from 20 October 2014 until the date of actual payment at the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations plus two percentage points; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the EESC to pay the applicant default interest on those amounts from 20 October 2014 until the date of actual payment at the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations plus two percentage points;

| — | Order the EESC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the EESC to pay the costs.

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****Getting ready for disaster[videorecording]: one family�s experience
 - IntroductionGet     InformedMake a     PlanDisaster     Supplies KitPeople with DisabilitiesFood     and WaterHelping     Children CopeGet     Involved
 - Transcript
 
 
SuDoc Number:HS 5.120:D 63/DVD
Item Number:0520-E-17 (online)
CGP System Number:000613324
 
September 26, 2017**
No. 53145.

#### Chew Chong Tai & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 140769-K, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 43103.

#### Protest 993218-G of Nippon Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 39806 the merchandise in question was held dutiable as unsalted dried fish at *1%*cents per pound under paragraph 717 (c) as claimed.
# C_2008190EN.01000201.xml

| 29.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

28 July 2008

(2008/C 190/02)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,5746 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 169,63 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4617 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79250 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4538 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6285 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 129,58 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0750 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 23,695 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 230,87 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7033 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,2053 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5455 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,390 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,8963 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6466 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,6087 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 12,2839 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,1163 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1453 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 584,99 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,8339 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,7650 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2203 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 357,99 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,1450 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 69,125 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,7500 |
| THB | Thai baht | 52,666 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,4735 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,8846 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,5746

JPY

Japanese yen

169,63

DKK

Danish krone

7,4617

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79250

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4538

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6285

ISK

Iceland króna

129,58

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0750

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

23,695

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

230,87

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7033

PLN

Polish zloty

3,2053

RON

Romanian leu

3,5455

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,390

TRY

Turkish lira

1,8963

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6466

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,6087

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

12,2839

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,1163

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1453

KRW

South Korean won

1 584,99

ZAR

South African rand

11,8339

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,7650

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2203

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 357,99

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,1450

PHP

Philippine peso

69,125

RUB

Russian rouble

36,7500

THB

Thai baht

52,666

BRL

Brazilian real

2,4735

MXN

Mexican peso

15,8846

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
# C_2016462EN.01001901.xml

| 12.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 October 2016 — Unicorn v EUIPO — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)

(Case T-201/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark UNICORN - Earlier national word and figurative marks UNICORN - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Reputation))

(2016/C 462/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Unicorn a.s. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: L. Lorenc, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mercilink Equipment Leasing Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 February 2015 (Case R 1699/2014-5), concerning invalidity proceedings between Unicorn and Mercilink Equipment Leasing.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Unicorn a.s. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Unicorn a.s. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 198, 15.6.2015.

1

---
(Reap. Dec. 8995)

Entry No. 864151.

#### A. Newberg & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided September 16, 1957)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Donlon, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto that the merchandise covered by the above mentioned appeal for reappraisement consist of 5000 lbs. of solid milk chocolate eggs imported from West Germany, and that said merchandise was appraised at a foreign value as defined in the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, at 7.14 D. M. per kilo, less 2% packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that on or about the date of the exportation of the merchandise here involved such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption in West Germany or for exportation to the United States, nor was comparable imported merchandise being offered freely within the United States, and that there was no foreign value, export value or United States value as defined in Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the correct cost of production for the said solid milk chocolate eggs, as defined in Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, was 51£ per lb., plus drawback of $132.93 for the said 5000 lbs., less inland freight of $54.95, for the said 5000 lbs. of solid milk chocolate eggs.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeal is abandoned as to any other merchandise listed on the invoices, and that this appeal may be deemed to be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

Accepting this stipulation as an agreed statement of facts, I find and hold that cost of production, as defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, is the proper basis for determination of the value of the instant merchandise, namely, 5,000 pounds of the solid milk chocolate eggs, and that such cost of production value is 51 cents per pound, plus drawback of $132.93, less inland freight of $54.95.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.