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



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-65923
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-32092
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-32096
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-53446
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-55978
    
    POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-73904
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-107659
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-125862
POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOForm S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-135910
 UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
 
 Hanover Compressor Company
  Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of 
incorporation or organization)
    
    76-0625124
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 12001 North Houston Rosslyn
Houston, Texas 77086
 1992 Stock Compensation Plan
1993 Management Stock Option Plan
1993 Senior Executive Stock Option Plan
1995 Amended and Restated Hanover Compressor Company Incentive Option Plan
1995 Senior Executive Stock Option Plan
1995 Management Option Plan
1995 Employee Stock Option Plan
1996 Employee Stock Option Plan
1997 Stock Option Plan
1998 Stock Option Plan
1999 Stock Option Plan
December 9, 1998 Stock Option Plan
1996 Employee Stock Offering
December 23, 1996 Common Stock Offering
1995 Management Stock Offering
1995 Employee Stock Offering
1993 Management Stock Offering
1992 Stock Offering
Subscription Agreement between Hanover Compressor Company and Donald M. Deville
1997 Stock Purchase Plan
Applied Process Solutions Incorporated Amended 1998 Stock Option Plan
The Hanover Companies Retirement Savings Plan
Hanover Compressor Company 2001 Equity Incentive Plan
Hanover Compressor Company 2003 Stock Incentive Plan
Hanover Compressor Company 2006 Stock Incentive Plan
 Donald C. Wayne
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
Exterran Holdings, Inc.
4444 Brittmoore
Houston, Texas 77041
(713) 335-7000




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  DEREGISTRATION OF UNSOLD SECURITIESSIGNATURES    Table of Contents  
 DEREGISTRATION OF UNSOLD SECURITIES
 Registrant
          Plans
 Merger
Agreement Universal Holdco Hanover Merger Sub Universal Merger
Sub Merger




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  Hanover Compressor Company 
(Registrant)By:
    /s/ Stephen A. SniderName:
    Stephen A. SniderTitle:
    President and Chief Executive
Officer  Signature
    
    Title/s/ Stephen A. Snider

Stephen A. Snider
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ J. Michael Anderson

J. Michael Anderson
    
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)/s/ Kenneth R. Bickett

Kenneth R. Bickett
    
    Vice President and Corporate Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)/s/ Brian A. Matusek

Brian A. Matusek
    
    Director
From: Leslie_Cramer@aksteel.com [mailt o:Leslie_Cramer@aksteel.com]

Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 1:35 PM

To: Richard Parker; Eric_Petersen@aksteel.com

Cc: Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Brian Coffey; Bruce Smith; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; Charlie Drexler; Charlie Stevens; Chris Bolduc; Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; Eric Pete rson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer Tiedeman; Jerry Corkran; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matt Miller; Matthew Nardotti; Meg Waltner; Meyers, Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond; Puesh Kumar; Richard Parker; Rick Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert va n Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo Subject: Comments on Competitiveness

This is email 2 of 2.

As requested, please find attached our comments regarding core material competitiveness.

Leslie Cramer

Administrative Assistant

Research AK Steel Corporation leslie_cramer@ aksteel.com (513) 425-5908

Confidentiality Notice This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12550]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary display in the exhibition “Project a Black Planet: The Art and Culture of Panafrica” at The Art Institute of Chicago, in Chicago, Illinois; and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Nicole L. Elkon,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2024-21831 Filed 9-23-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
#### RATLIFF v. STATE.

No. 13995.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 25, 1931.

Roy F. Formway, of Roby, and Glover En-■gledow, of Olairemont, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Aus■tin, for the State.

MORROW, P. J.

The unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale is the offense; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

This is the second appeal of this case. See Ratliff v. State, 25 S.W.(2d) 343.

The jury was told that, in order to convict the appellant, the state must prove that the liquor was possessed for the purpose of sale. The court instructed them that the possession by the appellant of more than one quart of intoxicating liquor was prima facie evidence that be possessed it for the purpose of sale, “but the defendant is entitled to introduce evidence showing that he had such liquor in his possession for lawful purposes.” The jury was also instructed that a person had the legal right to possess intoxicating liquor for medicinal purposes; that if the liquor was possessed by the appellant for medicinal purposes, or if there was a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury upon that subject, they should acquit him. Exception was reserved to the charge because the court failed to instruct the jury touching the appellant’s right to possess the liquor for beverage purposes, and, under the evidence and the facts, the accused was clearly entitled to such ,an instruction. He had been a heavy drinker for fifteen years. He had several quarts of whisky in his possession. The doctrine declared that the appellant’s long habit of drinking whisky could not be suddenly ceased. The instructions given are so framed as to leave the impression upon the jury that, unless the whisky was possessed by the appellant for medicinal purposes, he should be convicted. The facts are not' different from those on the former appeal (Ratliff v. State, supra), and the instructions given upon the present trial are in substance the same as those given upon the former trial.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
|                                                |
|------------------------------------------------|
|                                                |  |
| INDIANA                                        | 35-1544218 |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) |

----

|              |                                                                                                                   |
|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Exhibit 99.1 | Slide presentation, utilized January 28, 2016, during conference call and web cast by First Merchants Corporation |

----

----

|             |             |
|-------------|-------------|
| Exhibit No. | Description |

|      |                                                                                                                   |
|------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 99.1 | Slide presentation, utilized January 28, 2016, during conference call and web cast by First Merchants Corporation |
### TOTAL GHG EMISSIONS OF THE U.S. UNDER DIFFERENT SCENARIOS

8,000 7,000 —

.... - - 

### .. ea I. 

### N 6,000 0 V 

### ~ 5,000 

### ~ c 

### 0 m 4,000

~ 

### 3,000 C7



## _ ~ 

### 2,000 

### 7i

... 0 1,000 f 0 

## 1990 1995 2000 2005 — 

### Historic emissions, excl. LULUCF 2013 Current Policy projections Updated Current Policy projections including US Clean Power Plan Pledge pathway

i _ - r

-- - .- .. ~ ._._ ~ — ~ _ - 1 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Source: Bill Hare, Marie Lindberg, et al. Below 2 degrees C or 1.5 degrees C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and Non-Annex I countries, Climate Action Tracker, Policy Brief, June 4, 2014-revised June 7, 2014.

### (u 2.5 '

O i 

## O
~ 

## 0 U

~ 

### ~ 

### 15 . y -., 

### ., .•

~ ' •. • •. '•.• ' •• .. •

~ . ' • •• . •. ~ • . 

### .•
•~,~—_

.~ 1.0 

## o.s 0.0 J 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 

### Carbon Intensity (CO2 / Energy)
3.5 

# mm —Historical Emissions —2013 Current Policy projections (CAT assessment)

~ Updated Current Policy projections including US Clean Power Plan (CAT assessment) • • • • Likely 2•C pathway for decarbonization • • • • High probablility 2.0•C decarbonization pathway/ 1.5'C by 2100

Source: Bill Hare, Marie Lindberg, et al. Below 2 degrees C or 1.5 degrees C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and Non-Annex I countries, Climate Action Tracker, Policy Brief, June 4, 2014-revised June 7, 2014.
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-17-00253-CV 

IN RE BLANCA ALONZO CARRIZALES, RELATOR 

 

OPINION ON ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS 

 

July 31, 2017 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. 

Relator, Blanca Alonzo Carrizales, and real party in interest, Lubbock County 

Hospital District d/b/a University Medical Center, have filed a joint motion to voluntarily 

dismiss this original proceeding. Without passing on the merits of relator’s petition for 

writ of mandamus, we grant the motion and dismiss the petition. Having dismissed the 

petition for writ of mandamus at relator’s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained.

Per Curiam
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 21, 2009

s1214 

# Order

December 21, 2009

138833

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138833 COA: 281188 Ingham CC: 06-001354-FH DONALD RICHARD BLOWERS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the March 12, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMThe Board of Directors
#### Ex parte LYONS.

No. 18333.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1936.

Willis, Studer & Studer, of Pampa, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*355LATTIMORE, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district judge of Gray county remanding appellant to the custody of the sheriff of Marshall county, Okl.

The record consists of copies of the application for the writ, of the motion for new trial, and judgment. There is nothing in same from which this court may be apprised of the erroneous character of the action of the court below in remanding appellant.

The judgment is affirmed.