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

|   | Exhibit      21                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | SUBSIDIARIES      OF THE REGISTRANT                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | ·   Warrior Gas      Co., a Texas corporation, which has a wholly owned subsidiary, Clajon      Industrial Gas, Inc., a Texas corporation                                                                   |
|   | ·   Clayton      Williams Trading Company, a Texas corporation                                                                                                                                              |
|   | ·   Clayton      Williams Venezuela, Inc., a Delaware corporation                                                                                                                                           |
|   | ·   CWEI      Acquisitions, Inc., a Delaware corporation                                                                                                                                                    |
|   | ·   Clayton      Williams Pipeline Corporation (formerly Clayton Williams Midland, Inc.), a      Delaware corporation                                                                                       |
|   | ·   CWEI Romere      Pass Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation, which is the sole member      of Romere Pass Acquisition, L.L.C. (formerly Romere Pass Acquisition      Corp.)                         |
|   | ·   Warrior      Mississippi Corporation, a Delaware corporation                                                                                                                                            |
|   | ·        Southwest Royalties, Inc., a Delaware corporation, which has two wholly      owned subsidiaries, Blue Heel Company, a Delaware corporation and Tex-Hal      Partners, Inc., a Delaware corporation |
|   | ·   West Coast      Energy Properties GP, LLC, a Texas limited liability    company                                                                                                                         |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from InfoNow's
Quarterly report to stockholders for the three months ended March 31, 2000, and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                      1,000

<S>                                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                               JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                             9395
<SECURITIES>                                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       819
<ALLOWANCES>                                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  10415
<PP&E>                                                             2918
<DEPRECIATION>                                                     1667
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                    11699
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                              1974
<BONDS>                                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                                           0
<COMMON>                                                              8
<OTHER-SE>                                                         9693
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                      11699
<SALES>                                                            1805
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                   1805
<CGS>                                                              1049
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                      2608
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                    2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     745
<INCOME-TAX>                                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 745
<DISCONTINUED>                                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        745
<EPS-BASIC>                                                      0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      0.10



</TABLE>
Exhibit 109


		
			Exhibit 10.9
		

		
			FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
		

		
			THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this "Amendment") is dated effective as of July 18, 2016, by and between THE FEMALE HEALTH COMPANY, a Wisconsin corporation (the "Company"), and MICHELE GRECO (the "Executive").
		

		
			RECITALS
		

		
			The Company and Executive are parties to that certain Employment Agreement dated as of April 5, 2016 (the "Existing Agreement").  Capitalized terms used herein without definition shall have the respective meanings ascribed thereto in the Existing Agreement.
		

		
			In accordance with Section 11 of the Existing Agreement, the undersigned desire to amend the Existing Agreement as set forth in this Amendment.
		

		
			AGREEMENTS
		

		
			In consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual representations, warranties, covenants and agreements set forth herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as follows:
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			Sections 1 and 2 of the Existing Agreement are amended by replacing the term "Mergers" with "APP Merger" in each and every place where such term appears.




			
	
			
				 2.
			No Other Changes.  Except as expressly provided herein, the Existing Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.




			
	
			
				 3.
			Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, all of which shall be considered originals of one and the same agreement and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the parties hereto and delivered to the other parties.  Signatures delivered by facsimile or by e-mail in portable document format (PDF) shall be binding for all purposes hereof.




		
			[Signature page follows.]
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			 
		


		

		

		 

 

		IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the date first above written.
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			COMPANY:
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			THE FEMALE HEALTH COMPANY
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			BY     /s/  O.B. Parrish
		

		
			Name: O.B. Parrish
Title: Chief Executive Officer
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			EXECUTIVE:
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			/s/  Michele Greco
		

		
			Michele Greco
		

		
			﻿
		

		
			﻿
		

		 


		

			[Signature Page to First Amendment to Employment Agreement]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          67,834
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,373
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               110,797
<PP&E>                                          12,285
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 148,824
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,973
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,954
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,985
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                98,793
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,409
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,924
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,519)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,951
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,542
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,409
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,409
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33


</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE HUMBERTO JAUREGUI

GUTIERREZ; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

Nos. 07-72641

 07-74329

Agency Nos. A075-523-976

 A076-715-435

 A076-715-436

MEMORANDUM*

On Petitions for Review of Orders of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

In these consolidated cases, Jose Humberto Jauregui Gutierrez and his

family, natives and citizens of Peru, petition for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders denying their motion to reopen based upon

ineffective assistance of counsel and denying their motion to reconsider. We have

FILED

SEP 28 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-72641

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denials

of motions to reopen and motions to reconsider, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d

785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petitions for review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to

reopen because the motion was filed more than four years after the BIA’s

December 5, 2002, order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to

demonstrate that they acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling,

see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003) (equitable tolling

available “when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud,

or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”); see also Singh v.

Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2007).

The BIA also did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to

reconsider because petitioners failed to identify any error of fact or law in the

BIA’s June 1, 2007, order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS,

272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n.2 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). 

Petitioners’ contentions that the BIA failed to adequately address their

arguments and applied an incorrect legal standard are unsupported by the record.

PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 797 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 797

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         June 23, 2016.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2577) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban 
Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, 
and for other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered 
as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the conference 
report to its adoption without intervening motion. During consideration of the 
conference report, the second sentence of clause 1(a) of rule XIX shall not 
apply.
    Sec. 2.  It shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to 
consider concurrent resolutions providing for adjournment during the month of 
July, 2016.
    Sec. 3.  On any legislative day during the period from June 23, 2016, 
through July 4, 2016--
     (a) the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered 
as approved; and
    (b) the Chair may at any time declare the House adjourned to meet at a date 
and time, within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article I of the 
Constitution, to be announced by the Chair in declaring the adjournment.
    Sec. 4.  The Speaker may appoint Members to perform the duties of the Chair 
for the duration of the period addressed by section 3 of this resolution as 
though under clause 8(a) of rule I.
    Sec. 5.  It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of June 23, 
2016, or June 24, 2016, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House 
suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV. The Speaker or his 
designee shall consult with the Minority Leader or her designee on the 
designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this section.
    Sec. 6.  Upon adoption of the conference report specified in the first 
section of this resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 139 shall be considered 
as adopted.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
# C_2021502EN.01001702.xml

| 13.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 502/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 502/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ v Commission

(Case T-240/18) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Air transport - Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Relevant market - Assessment of the effects of the concentration on competition - Absence of commitment - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 502/26)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Jeżewski and M. König, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Wildpanner, T. Franchoo and J. Szczodrowski, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: easyJet plc (Luton, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Odriozola Alén, I. Terlecka and T. Reeves, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 8776 final of 12 December 2017 (Case No COMP/M.8672 — easyJet / Certain Air Berlin assets) declaring a concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 200, 11.6.2018.

---
# C_2018381EN.01000401.xml

| 22.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/4

---

Appeal brought on 12 July 2018 by HK against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Eighth Chamber) on 3 May 2018 in Case T-574/16 HK v Commission

(Case C-460/18 P)

(2018/C 381/05)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: HK (represented by: A. Champetier, S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that the appeal is admissible and well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that the appeal is admissible and well founded;

| — | Annul the judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 (Case T-574/16); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 (Case T-574/16);

| — | Dispose of the case itself by upholding the claims made at first instance by the appellant, including the claim that the defendant be ordered to pay the costs; or in the alternative |
| --- | --- |

—

Dispose of the case itself by upholding the claims made at first instance by the appellant, including the claim that the defendant be ordered to pay the costs; or in the alternative

| — | Refer the case back to the General Court for a ruling and, in those circumstances, make an order as to the costs of the appeal in accordance with Article 184 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

Refer the case back to the General Court for a ruling and, in those circumstances, make an order as to the costs of the appeal in accordance with Article 184 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the appellant relies on two grounds. The first ground is based on infringement of the first paragraph of Article 17 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, and the ambiguous, incoherent and contradictory nature of the statement of reasons. The second ground is based on infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and the inadequate statement of reasons.

---
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.1



Nexeo Solutions, Inc.
Non-Employee Director Compensation Summary
Adopted by the Board of Directors on July 26, 2016
Cash Compensation:
	
		
	Non-Employee Director Annual Retainer
	$100,000

	Non-Executive Chairman of the Board Annual Retainer
	$100,000

	Lead Director Annual Retainer
	$20,000 

	Audit Committee Chair Annual Retainer
	$20,000

	Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair Annual Retainer
	$12,500

	Compensation Committee Chair Annual Retainer
	S15,000






Non-Employee Director compensation is payable in equal quarterly installments on or about the first business day of each fiscal quarter.
Non-Employee Directors are also eligible to receive an annual retainer of a restricted stock award with a grant date value of $100,000 granted (with the value based on the closing price of Nexeo’s common shares on the date prior to the grant date and the number of units rounded to the nearest whole unit). The restricted stock vests one year from the date of grant. The first grant was made on July 26, 2016; additional grants may be pro-rated  as applicable based on additional grant dates.
Nexeo also requires that Non-Employee Directors maintain an ownership position in Nexeo of at least 5 times the value of the annual Cash Non-Employee Director Annual Retainer; provided, however, that new directors shall have five (5) years from their initial election to the Board to reach this ownership threshold. Pursuant to Nexeo’s policies, directors are also reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000880114
<NAME> BELDEN & BLAKE CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          13,740
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,167
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      7,733
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,572
<PP&E>                                         586,510
<DEPRECIATION>                                 256,759
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 402,481
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,575
<BONDS>                                        362,894
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,023
<OTHER-SE>                                    (38,254)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   402,481
<SALES>                                         34,253
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,356
<CGS>                                           20,037
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,037
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,805
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,439
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,925)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,768)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,157)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,157)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0600

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ASHLEY MARIA HOWARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 13, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 4 2022

05/04/2022

Case Number: DA 20-0600
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors
MicroTel International, Inc.

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Nos. 333-74281, 333-71035, 333-69571, 333-12567 and 333-65528) on
Form S-8 of our report dated February 25, 2002, relating to the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedule of MicroTel International,
Inc. appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001.

/S/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP
BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Orange County, California
April 1, 2002