alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 8.1  CENTERPULSE WORLDWIDE GROUP  Centerpulse
  Ltd., ZurichCenterpulse Management Ltd., SwitzerlandCenterpulse Orthopedics (Switzerland) Ltd.,
  SwitzerlandCenterpulse India Ltd., IndiaCenterpulse Japan KK, JapanLeading KK, Japan (33.33%)Centerpulse Korea Ltd., KoreaCenterpulse Services Ltd., SwitzerlandCenterpulse Orthopedics Ltd., SwitzerlandAndromis SA, Switzerland (7.924%)Centerpulse RSA (Pty) Ltd., South AfricaSulzer Cardiovascular BV, NetherlandsCenterpulse Netherlands BV, NetherlandsCenterpulse France SA, FranceCenterpulse Industrie Sarl, France(74.94%)Centerpulse Quest Sarl, France (owns 5% of
  Centerpulse Industrie Sarl)Centerpulse Sud-Quest Sarl, France (owns
  11.06% of Centerpulse Industrie Sarl)Centerpulse Centre Sarl, France (owns 9% of
  Centerpulse Industrie Sarl)Centerpulse Nord Sarl, FranceCenterpulse BeLux SA/NV, BelgiumCenterpulse Ibérica SA, SpainCenterpulse Orthopedics Sweden AB, SwedenAllo Systems SrL, Italy (51%)Centerpulse Italy S.p.A., ItalyMigliori SrL, Italy (51%)Centerpulse CZ sro, Czech RepublicCenterpulse Finance (Curacao) N.V.,
  Netherlands AntillesCenterpulse USA Holding Co., Delaware, U.S.Sulzer Carbomedics International Holding
  Co, Delaware, U.S.Sulzer Mitroflow Corp., Nova ScotiaSulzer Carbomedics Inc., Delaware, U.S.Sulzer Carbomedics Canada Ltd., CanadaSulzer Carbomedics UK Ltd., United KingdomSulzer Cardiovascular SA, FranceSulzer Cardiovascular Ltd., SwitzerlandSulzer Medica Canada Inc., CanadaCenterpulse USA Inc., Delaware, U.S.Thoratec Corp., Delaware, U.S. (0.09%)Centerpulse International FSC Inc., U.S.
  Virgin IslandsCenterpulse Biologics Inc., New Jersey,
  U.S.Centerpulse Orthopedics Inc., Delaware,
  U.S.Centerpulse Orthopedics Canada Inc., CanadaCenterpulse Spine-Tech Inc., Delaware, U.S.Centerpulse Spine-Tech Surgical Inc.,
  Minnesota, U.S.Medical Investment Acquisition Corp.,
  Delaware, U.S.   1 
  CENTERPULSE WORLDWIDE GROUP   Centerpulse Dental Inc., Delaware, U.S.Centerpulse Dental Corp., CanadaCenterpulse Dental GmbH, GermanyCenterpulse Dental Sarl, FranceCenterpulse Dental Ltd., IsraelCenterpulse Dental Australia Pty, AustraliaDisc Dynamics, Minnesota, U.S. (0.9%)@Outcome Inc., Texas, U.S. (1.96%)Regen Inc., Delaware, U.S. (11.885%)Cardiomedics Inc., Nevada, U.S. (1.78%)Orquest Inc., California, U.S. (9.472%)Japan Lifeline Co. Ltd., Japan (2.831%)Tutogen Medical Inc, Florida, U.S. (34.95%)Centerpulse Austria GmbH, AustriaSM RE Ltd., GuernseyCenterpulse (UK) Ltd., United KingdomOrthosoft Inc., Canada (18.9%)Centerpulse Germany Holding GmbH, GermanySulzer Cardiovascular GmbH, GermanyCenterpulse Germany GmbH, GermanyBiovision GmgH, Germany (19%)Centerpulse Australia PTY Ltd., Australia  2
Exhibit 99.1


                            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 Quarterly Report of Noble Roman's, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul W. Mobley,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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.

                                  /s/ Paul W. Mobley
                                  -------------------------------------------
                                  Paul W. Mobley
                                  Chief Executive Officer of Noble Roman's, Inc.

                                  May 6, 2003
ex10-1.htm


    EXHIBIT
10.1

    AMENDMENT
OF

    2008
AMENDED AND RESTATED ACCO BRANDS CORPORATION

    SUPPLEMENTAL
RETIREMENT PLAN

     

    WHEREAS,
the Company sponsors the 2008 Amended and Restated ACCO Brands Corporation
Supplemental Retirement Plan (the “SRP”);

     

    WHEREAS,
the Company may amend the Plan at any time; and

     

    WHEREAS,
in connection with the freeze of the ACCO Brands Corporation Pension Plan for
Salaried and Certain Hourly Paid Employees, the Company deems it appropriate to
amend the SRP to freeze all future benefit accruals effective March 7,
2009.

     

    NOW,
THEREFORE, the Company amends the SRP, effective the date hereof, as
follows:

     

    1.    Capitalized
terms not defined herein shall have the meaning as defined under the
Plan.

     

    2.    Section
3(g) shall be added to Section 3, to immediately follow Section 3(f), as
follows:

     

    “(g)         Anything
herein to the contrary notwithstanding, the Plan is frozen effective March 7,
2009, and accordingly:

     

    (i)    No
Participant shall accrue any supplemental annual retirement benefit (or
pre-retirement survivor annuity benefit that may be payable thereon) on and
after March 7, 2009;

     

    (ii)    No
compensation increases earned by a Participant on and after March 7, 2009 shall
be taken into account to determine the amount of any accrued benefit due and
owing to any Participant on and after March 7, 2009; and

     

    (iii)    No
service of any Participant shall be taken into account for purposes of benefit
accruals on and after March 7, 2009 in determining the amount of the
Participant’s accrued benefit under the Plan;

     

    provided,
that Participants shall continue to earn vesting service for the purposes of
determining the Participant’s entitlement to a nonforfeitable benefit upon
retirement or other severance of employment under the Plan after March 7,
2009.”

     

    3.    Section
2(f), the definition of Eligible Employee, is
amended by adding, immediately following the last sentence thereof, the
following sentence:

     

    “Anything
herein to the contrary notwithstanding, no person, who is not a Participant,
shall become an Eligible Employee after March 6, 2009.”

     

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        
        

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    

     

    WHEREFORE,
the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by a duly authorized
officer as of this 20th day of January, 2009.

     

    
      
        	 	ACCO
      BRANDS CORPORATION	 
	 	 	 	 
	
                 

              	
                By:
      

              	 /s/ Steven
      Rubin	 
	 	 Its:	 Senior
      Vice President,	 
	 	 	Secretary
      & General Counsel	 
	 	 	 	 


      

    

     

          

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        2
SVP Bonus Plan



 Exhibit 10.3 
 Senior Vice President Bonus Plan 
 Bonus Calculation 
 The Senior Vice Presidents of Websense, Inc. (the “Participants”) not covered by another cash incentive compensation program will be eligible for a target bonus of 50% of their respective annual salary. This
bonus is based upon the Company meeting its Billings and/or Operating Income objectives determined by the Company’s Board of Directors or its Compensation Committee near the beginning of each fiscal year. 
 Each half of the Company’s fiscal year (January — June and July — December) in which the Company meets its budgeted Billings and/or Operating Income
targets, each Participant is eligible to receive an amount equal to 33.33% of their semi-annual salary as a bonus. Half of the semi-annual bonus (16.67%) is earned if the Company meets its semi-annual Billings objective and the other half of
the semi-annual bonus (16.67%) is earned if the Company achieves its semi-annual Operating Income target. 
 An additional 16.67% of the
Participant’s annual salary may be earned, again split evenly between objectives, if the Company achieves its annual Billings and Operating Income targets. 
 Achievement of at least 90% of a goal is required for any payment of the portion of the Participant’s bonus that is based on achievement by the Company of that goal. Should the Company achieve 90% of its Billings or Operating Income
goals, bonuses for that plan goal will be paid at half of the target payment for that goal. Should the Company achieve 110% of its Billings or Operating Income goals, bonuses for that plan goal will be paid at 1.5 times what the Participants would
have been paid on target for that goal. Bonuses are prorated for goal achievement between 90% - 110%. 
 Eligibility 
 Participants must be a current employee on the last day of the semi-annual period (June 30th and December 31st) to be eligible to receive a bonus for that half and
must be a current employee on the last day of the fiscal year to be eligible to receive an annual bonus. Participants who start their employment during a period or are promoted into a Participant position must be employed for at least the full final
quarter of the semi-annual period or annual period to be eligible, and will have their bonus prorated accordingly. Bonus amounts are based upon actual base salary paid during the period, exclusive of other payments or bonuses. 
 The Company reserves the right to change these terms from time to time as it feels necessary to accomplish its goals, including as a result of market conditions,
personnel, new or different product offerings and/or corporate restructuring.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE REGISTRANT'S JUNE 30, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         165,329
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,116,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (80,559)
<INVENTORY>                                    882,596
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,124,546
<PP&E>                                      25,817,563
<DEPRECIATION>                             (9,209,681)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,531,090
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,384,582
<BONDS>                                      6,676,895
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    203,580
<COMMON>                                       407,800
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,014,092
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,531,090
<SALES>                                     13,452,909
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,018,531
<CGS>                                       10,237,844
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,320,329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                48,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (464,758)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (766,556)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (766,556)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (766,556)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.05)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 82 (Friday, April 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 20994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10417]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Public Information Collection Requirement Submitted to Office of 
Management and Budget for Review

April 19, 1995.
    The Federal Communications Commission has submitted the following 
information collection requirements to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507).
    Copies of these submissions may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc., 2100 M 
Street, NW, Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-3800. For 
further information on this submission contact Dorothy Conway, Federal 
Communications Commission, (202) 418-0217 or via internet at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="185c5b77766f7961585e5b5b365f574e36">[email protected]</a> Persons wishing to comment on this information 
collection should contact Timothy Fain, Office of Management and 
Budget, Room 10214 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-3561.

OMB Number: 3060-0010.
    Title: Ownership Report.
    Form No.: FCC 323.
    Action: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit.
    Frequency of Response: Annually.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 10,574 annual responses; 7.166 hours 
burden per response; 75,773 hours total annual burden.
    Needs and Uses: Licensees/permitees of commercial broadcast 
stations are required to file ownership reports (FCC 323). The data is 
used by FCC personnel to determine if the licensees/permittees are 
abiding by FCC's multiple ownership rules and are compliance with the 
transfer of control provisions, the alien ownership restrictions and 
the CATV-TV cross-ownership prohibitions set fourth in the 
Communications Act.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10417 Filed 4-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-0l-F

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT EARL JOSEPH, Pe titione r - Appe lla nt, v. UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, R

e sponde nt - Appe lle e . No. 13-16760

D.C . Nos. 5:08-c v-04607-R M W 00-c r-20217-R

M W M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia R ona ld M . Whyte , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d July 22, 2014 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, C ANB Y, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s . Fe de ra l prisone r Earl Jose ph a ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt de ny ing his 28 U.S.C . § 2255 m otion. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 2253, a

nd we a ffirm . Jose ph c onte n d s tha

t he wa s e ntitle d to a

n e vide ntia

ry he aring on his c la im 

# FIL ED JUL 28 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).that

his c onvic tions a

re ba se d on pe rjure d

te stim ony . W e re vie w the distric t c ourt’ s de nia l of a

n e vide ntia

ry he aring for a

buse of disc re tion, se e Unite d State s v . Rodrigue s , 347 F.3d 818, 823 (9th C ir. 2003), a nd its fa c tua l findings for c le ar e rror, se e Unite d State

s v . Zuno-Arc e , 339 F.3d 886, 888 (9th C ir. 2003). The distric t c o urt prope rly

de nie d Jose ph’ s c l a im

without a n e vide ntia

ry he a ring be c a use the re c ord shows tha

t the distric t c ourt did not c le arly e rr in a ny of its fa c t ua l findings a

nd the re c o rd wa s suffic ie ntly de ve lope d for the c ourt to c onc lude that the c la im la c k e d m e rit. Se eUnite d State s v . Me jia-Me sa , 153 F.3d 925, 931 (9th C ir. 1998) (no e v i de ntia ry he aring is re quire d if, in light of the re c ord, the m ova nt’ s a l le gations a

re “ pa lpa bly inc re dible or pate ntly

frivolous” ). W e c onstrue Jose p h’ s a dditional a rgum e nts a s a m otion to e xpa nd the c e rtific ate of a

ppe a la bility . So c onstrue d, the m otion is denie d. Se e 9th C i r. R . 22- 1(e ); Hiiv ala v . W

ood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th C ir. 1999) (pe r c uriam ). AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 1 6 7 6 0 2
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Page 1

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Tanya E. Moore, SBN 206683 

MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. 

332 North Second Street 

San Jose, California 95112 

Telephone (408) 298-2000 

Facsimile (408) 298-6046 

Email: service@mission.legal 

Attorney for Plaintiff, 

Albert Dytch

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ALBERT DYTCH, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

ANTONIO MAGANA dba FLACOS, et al., 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 3:17-cv-00438-SI 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF 

ENTIRE ACTION WITH THE COURT’S 

RETENTION OF JURISDICTION TO 

RESOLVE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM FOR 

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

 
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Page 2

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff, Albert Dytch (“Plaintiff”),

and Defendant, Maxaco, LLC (“Defendant,” and together with Plaintiff, “the Parties”), all 

remaining parties to this action, by and through their respective counsel, that pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), the above-captioned action be dismissed with 

prejudice. 

 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED by the Parties that the Court shall expressly retain 

jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of adjudicating any subsequent motion Plaintiff 

may bring to recover his attorneys’ fees and costs (“Fees Motion”). Any Fees Motion shall be 

filed within 45 days of the date the Court issues its Order on this stipulation. 

Dated: January 22, 2019 MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. 

 /s/ Tanya E. Moore 

 Tanya E. Moore 

 Attorney for Plaintiff, 

 Albert Dytch 

Dated: January 22, 2019 

 /s/ Peter A. Magganas 

 Peter A. Magganas 

 Attorney for Defendant, 

 Maxaco, LLC 

 

ATTESTATION 

Concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the individual(s) 

whose electronic signature is attributed above. 

 /s/ Tanya E. Moore 

 Tanya E. Moore 

 Attorney for Plaintiff, 

 Albert Dytch 
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Page 3

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

ORDER 

The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 

 1. The Court retainA jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of adjudicating 

any motion brought by Plaintiff to recover his attorneys’ fees and costs (“Fees Motion”).

 2. Plaintiff shall file any Fees Motion within 45 days of the date of this Order. 

 3. Except as provided for in paragraph 1, the action is dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 SUSAN ILLSTON

 United States District Judge 

1/28/19
Kirk DIXON, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-9353.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTIN DULBERG, individually, and on

behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and RASIER,

LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00850-WHA

FURTHER REQUEST FOR

INFORMATION

The Court thanks counsel for providing the requested information (Dkt. No. 150). The

information provided shows that many class members will receive a de minimis recovery under

this settlement. In other words, a large number of class members will recover an amount less

than the cost to print, process, and mail the check. Were this action to press forward, and these

de minimis class members to prevail at trial, the recovery for many would not be this low. The

issue remains that due to their trifling recovery amount proposed in this settlement, these class

members may be inclined to take their chance at trial. Their exclusion from the proposed

settlement would further inch the remaining class members towards a net recovery closer to the

calculated shortfall.

It is true the de minimis class members at issue did not object to or exclude themselves

from the proposed settlement. Still, would the parties agree to stipulate to exclude these class

members from the proposed settlement? A smaller class would release claims than currently

Case 3:17-cv-00850-WHA Document 151 Filed 04/30/19 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

proposed, but, as Uber’s counsel has continuously pointed out, these class members were only

slightly worse off under the policies at issue in this action to begin with. 

If the parties agree to stipulate to exclude these class members from the settlement, a

second round of notice (informing these de minimis class members that they will be excluded

from the settlement) would need to be sent out. Please answer by Thursday at NOON.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 30, 2019. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00850-WHA Document 151 Filed 04/30/19 Page 2 of 2
COLLIER COUNTY, Florida, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Robert VOCISANO & Mario Vocisano, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1722

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.