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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 2000 AND THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATION FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED
JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      10,156,000
<SECURITIES>                                 7,088,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               40,157,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,451,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,206,000
<PP&E>                                      69,732,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              17,714,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             180,450,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       39,421,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       337,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               180,450,000
<SALES>                                     54,133,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            86,849,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             3,043,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,064,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (38,531,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (38,531,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (38,531,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.84)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY

ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of NextMart, Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended
September 30, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Daniel Sobolewski, Interim President and Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|By: | /s/ Daniel Sobolewski                                 | 
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------- | 
|    | Daniel Sobolewski                                     | 
|    | Interim President and Interim Chief Executive Officer | 
|    | (Principal Executive Officer)                         | 
|    | January 10, 2019                                      | 





A signed original of this certification
required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2998 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on hydrolite 5. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mr. MENENDEZ introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on hydrolite 

5. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. HYDROLITE 5. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.11.60 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 1,2-Pentanediol) is amended by striking the date in the 

7 effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2998 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
exhibit10_1.htm


 







Exhibit 10.1


 


Standard Non-Employee Director Compensation


(Adopted by the Board of Directors August 3, 2011)


 



	
Annual Fees


	
Annual Fees — Each Non-Employee Director:


	
$17,500 (payable in quarterly installments)


	
An award on the date of each Annual Meeting of Stockholders of shares of restricted common stock that has an accounting income charge under FAS 123R of $50,000 and that is subject to the following basic terms:


	
Restrictions:  The shares may not be sold, assigned, transferred, pledged or otherwise disposed of until they vest.  In addition, as a condition to the award, the recipient must agree that so long as he is a director of the Company, he will retain and not sell or otherwise dispose of at least that number of shares of the Company's common stock that have been awarded to him as director compensation that is equal in market value to the sum of the cash fees paid to him in the previous two calendar years.


Vesting:  Vesting of the restricted stock award shares shall occur on the trading day immediately preceding the following year's Annual Meeting of Stockholders, but earlier upon the death of the director; upon the director becoming permanently disabled; and upon a change in control of the Company as defined in the Company's Stock Incentive Plan.


Forfeiture:  The shares of restricted stock shall be forfeited in the event that prior to vesting, the director ceases to be a director other than by reason of his death, permanent disability or a change in control of the Company.


	
Additional Annual Fees:


(payable in quarterly installments)

	  
	
     Lead Director

	
$10,000         


	
    Chairman of the Audit Committee

	
$12,500


	
    Chairman of the Compensation Committee

	
$7,500


	
Chairman of the Corporate Governance & Nominating Committee

	
$7,500





 


	
Meeting Fees*


	
In-Person Meetings

	
Per Director/Per Meeting


	
Board Meetings

	
$1,500


	
Committee Meetings

	  
	
Audit Committee Meetings


in connection with a Board meeting


not in connection with a Board meeting


Other Committee Meetings


in connection with a Board meeting


not in connection with a Board meeting

	
 


$1,000


$1,500


 


$750


$1,500


	
Telephonic Meetings (Board & Committee Meetings; Flash Report Conference Calls)

	  
	
One hour or longer

	
 $750


	
Less than one hour

	
 $500













	
*

	
Board and committee meetings (in person) that run over from one day to the next are paid as a single meeting.  Meetings of non-employee directors in person or by conference telephone call that are not formal, minuted meetings are paid as a regular Board meeting.  Time spent by non-employee directors at the Company's investor conferences or attending continuing education events are not separately compensated, but the expenses of doing so are reimbursed.







 




29
NUMBER 13-15-00609-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

 

CRESENCIANO OLIVA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 445th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Appellant’s brief was originally due on April 18, 2016. Counsel filed a motion for 

extension of time until June 20, 2016, which was granted by the Court. On June 28, 

2016, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant’s counsel that the brief had not been filed 
2

and requested a response concerning the failure to file the brief within ten days. Counsel 

has nevertheless failed to file either a response or an appellate brief in this matter.

Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court 

for further proceedings pursuant to Rule 38.8(b)(2) and (3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to make 

appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following: (1) whether 

appellant desires to prosecute this appeal; (2) why appellant's counsel has failed to file a 

brief and whether counsel has effectively abandoned the appeal; (3) whether appellant 

has been denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) whether appellant's counsel should 

be removed; and (5) whether appellant is indigent and entitled to court-appointed counsel.

If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal, that 

present counsel should be removed, and that appellant is indigent and entitled to 

court-appointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint new counsel to represent appellant 

in this appeal. If new counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and 

state bar number of said counsel shall be included in an order appointing counsel.

The trial court shall cause its findings and recommendations, together with any 

orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental 

clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record 

of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental 

reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the 

expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED.
3

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

2nd day of August, 2016.
ex10_16.htm


Exhibit 10.16


AMENDMENT TO THE


MUELLER INDUSTRIES, INC.


2002 STOCK OPTION PLAN


 


July 11, 2011


 


WHEREAS, Mueller Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Mueller Industries, Inc. 2002 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”), as amended and restated on February 16, 2006; and


 


WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9 of the Plan, the board of directors of the Company (the “Board”) may amend the Plan at any time; and


 


WHEREAS, the Board has determined it to be in the best interests of the Company to amend the Plan.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 



	  	
1.

	
Section 5(h) thereof shall be amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


	  	  	
“(h)           For purposes of the Plan, “Fair Market Value” means, as of any date when the Common Stock is listed on one or more national securities exchanges, the mean between the highest and lowest sale prices of the Common Stock reported on the principal national securities exchange on which such Common Stock is listed and traded on the date of determination, or, if there is no such sale on that date, then on the last preceding date on which such a sale was reported. If the Common Stock is not listed on an exchange, or representative quotes are not otherwise available, the Fair Market Value shall mean the amount determined by the Board of Directors in good faith, and in a manner consistent with Section 409A of the Code, to be the fair market value per share of Common Stock.”


 


	  	
2.

	
Governing Law.  This Amendment shall be construed and governed by the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to conflicts of laws principles thereof which might refer such interpretations to the laws of a different state or jurisdiction.


 


	  	
3.

	
Full Force and Effect of the Plan.  Except as specifically amended herein, all other provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.


 












 



	  	
Mueller Industries, Inc.


	  	
Board of Directors


	  	
July 11, 2011
Order issued October ~ 0 ,2012

In The

No. 05-12-00650-CV

STARCO IMPEX, INC. D/BIA WHOLESALE OUTLET, Appellant

VO

KATALYST BEVERAGE CORPORATION, Appelle~

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s October 23, 2012 third unopposed motion for an extension of time

to file a brief. We ORDER the brief tendered to this Court by appellant on October 23, 2012 filed

as of the date of this order.
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

RICARDO VELA-LUQUE, a.k.a. Ricardo

Vela Luque,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-72032

Agency No. A094-811-095

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 8, 2012** 

Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Ricardo Vela-Luque, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for relief under the

FILED

AUG 13 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-72032

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings,

Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition

for review.

Contrary to Vela-Luque’s contentions, substantial evidence supports the

BIA’s denial of his CAT claim because Vela-Luque did not establish it is more

likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the

Peruvian government. See Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the quarterly Report of Saratoga Resources, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.

the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2.

the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.







|                        |  |                                 
|----------------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Date: November 19, 2008 |  | /s/ Edward Hebert               
|                        |  | Name:  Edward Hebert            
|                        |  | Title:  Vice President  Finance
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3065 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3065

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain sports footwear for men with 
   outer soles of rubber or plastics and uppers of textile materials.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 9, 2012

   Mr. Wyden introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reduce temporarily the duty on certain sports footwear for men with 
   outer soles of rubber or plastics and uppers of textile materials.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN SPORTS FOOTWEAR FOR MEN WITH OUTER SOLES OF RUBBER 
              OR PLASTICS AND UPPERS OF TEXTILE MATERIALS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Sports footwear,    0.2%         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        tennis shoes,                                                      31/2015.......
                        basketball shoes,
                        gym shoes,
                        training shoes
                        and the like with
                        outer soles of
                        rubber or
                        plastics and
                        uppers of textile
                        materials, having
                        uppers of which
                        over 50 percent
                        of the external
                        surface area
                        (including any
                        leather
                        accessories or
                        reinforcements)
                        is leather, the
                        foregoing for men
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        6404.11.20)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.3 
 NetScout Systems, Inc. 
 Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation

 Effective as of September 2011, non-employee directors are compensated $36,000 annually for their services and do not
receive any additional compensation for any regular Board meeting attended. The lead non-employee director receives an additional annual retainer of $30,000. Non-employee directors currently receive $10,000 annually for serving on the Audit
Committee, $8,000 annually for serving on the Compensation Committee, and $6,000 annually for serving on the Nominating Committee. In addition, directors who are chairpersons of a particular committee are also given additional annual compensation of
$20,000 for the Audit Committee, and $10,000 for the Compensation Committee, and $8,000 for the Nominating Committee and $6,000 for the Finance Committee. Finance Committee members receive $1,000 for each meeting attended in person and $800 for each
meeting attended via telephone. Non-employee directors are also reimbursed for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Board or of any committee and for attendance at approved director education programs.

 Non-employee directors are granted annually equity-based awards in the form of restricted stock units and related cash
amounts upon vesting to defray the corresponding tax liability as follows: 
  

													
	 Element
	  	Role/Position	 
	  	Lead Director	 	  	Chairperson	 	  	Other Directors	 
	 Total value (RSU Grant and Cash Offset)
	  	$	200,000	  	  	$	150,000	  	  	$	125,000	  
	 RSU Grant
	  	$	120,000	  	  	$	90,000	  	  	$	75,000	  
	 Cash Offset
	  	$	80,000	  	  	$	60,000	  	  	$	50,000	  

 These restricted stock unit awards vest 100% on the date of our annual meeting provided that during such
year, such director attends at least 75%, collectively, of the meetings of the Board and any committee of the Board of which such director is a member. In the event that the foregoing attendance requirements are not met, then 100% of these
restricted stock units will vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant. No other equity awards are given to our non-employee directors.
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________
No. 23

- 11045
Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________
JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ DOMINGO, Petitioner,

versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A098

- 801

- 117

____________________ USCA11 Case: 23-11045 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 08/09/2023 Page: 1 of 32 Opinion of the Court 23

- 11045

Before J ILL P RYOR , G RANT, and L AGOA , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Juan Hernandez Domingo seeks review of the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) February 21, 2023 order reinstating his October 2005 order of removal. The government moves to dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. Hernandez Domingo ha s not filed a response to the motion

. The government argues that our decision in Jimenez

- Morales v. U.S. Att’y Gen. , 821 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2016) has been abrogated by later Supreme Court decisions and, thus, Hernandez Domingo’s petition is untimely. Alternatively, the government argues that the petition is premature as the reinstatement order is not final because withholding

- only proceedings remain pending. We need not decide whether Jimenez

- Morales has been abrogated because we lack jurisdiction in any event

. If the reinstatement order was final when DHS issued it on February 21, 2023, the petition for review is untimely and we lack jurisdiction to consider it. In that case, t he statutory time limit required Hernandez Domingo to file his petition for review no later than March 23, 2023, which was 30 days after DHS issued the February 21, 2023 reinstatement order , and Hernandez Domingo did not file his petition until April 3, 2023

. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1) (“ The petition for review must be filed not later than 30 days after the date of the final order of removal. ”); Avila v. U.S. Att ’ y Gen. , 560 F.3d 1281, 1284 (11th Cir. 2009) (holding that a n order of USCA11 Case: 23-11045 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 08/09/2023 Page: 2 of 323

- 11045 Opinion of the Court 3 reinstatement of a removal order is reviewable on appeal as a final order ) ; Chao Lin v. U .S. Att’y Gen. , 677 F.3d 1043, 1045

- 46 (11th Cir. 2012) (noting that t he statutory time limit for filing a petition for review in an immigration proceeding is mandatory
, jurisdictional
, and not subject to equitable tolling )

. If the reinstatement order has not become final because the withholding

- only proceedings are pending, the petition for review is premature and cannot invoke our jurisdiction. See Jimenez

- Morales , 821 F.3d at 1308

- 09. Accordingly, the government’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 1

1 All other pending motions are DENIED as moot. USCA11 Case: 23-11045 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 08/09/2023 Page: 3 of 3