alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 10.3

                   NONEMPLOYEE DIRECTORS COMPENSATION PROGRAM
                   ------------------------------------------


RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY DIRECTORS ON APRIL 26, 1997:

          RESOLVED, that the Corporation pay each director of the Corporation
     who is not an employee of the Corporation or Ripplewood Holdings L.L.C. an
     annual retainer in the amount of $20,000, payable in Class A Common Shares.

RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY DIRECTORS ON MARCH 17, 1997:

          WHEREAS, at a meeting held on April 26, 1996, the Board of Directors
     approved a compensation program for the directors of the Corporation who
     are not employees of the Corporation or Ripplewood Holdings L.L.C.
     ("Ripplewood") under which each such director is entitled to an annual
     retainer in the amount of $20,000, payable in Class A Common Shares,
     without par value, of the Corporation ("Class A Shares"); and

          WHEREAS, at the time such program was approved, the timing of the
     payment of the annual retainer was not determined, and no retainer payments
     have yet been made;

          NOW, THEREFORE, IT HEREBY IS RESOLVED, that the $20,000 annual
     retainer payable to each director who is not an employee of the Corporation
     or Ripplewood shall be paid at or as soon as practicable after the date of
     each Annual Meeting of Shareholders to each such director who continues as
     a director following such meeting, by the issuance by the Corporation of
     Class A Shares with a value (based on the closing price of a Class A Share
     on the last trading day prior to such Annual Meeting) of $20,000, rounded
     to the nearest whole share.

          FURTHER RESOLVED, that if a director who is not an employee of the
     Corporation or Ripplewood is elected to the Board of Directors at any time
     other than at an Annual Meeting of Shareholders, such director shall
     receive as soon as practicable after such election a retainer payable by
     the issuance by the Corporation of Class A Shares with a value equal to
     $20,000, prorated for the period from the date of such election until the
     next Annual Meeting of Shareholders (based on the closing price of a Class
     A Share on the last trading day prior to such election), rounded to the
     nearest whole share.

          FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Corporation also shall issue to Messrs.
     Andrews, Diggs and Holmes, on or as soon as practical after the date of the
     1997 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, a number of Class A Shares with a
     value equal to $20,000, prorated for the period from the earlier of the
     date he was elected as a director of the Corporation or April 26, 1996
     until the date of the 1997 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (based on the
     closing price of a Class A Share on the last trading day prior to the 1997
     Annual Meeting of Shareholders), rounded to the nearest whole share.
Jesse Nathaniel PENN, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6832.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK SBIR Applications Developing New Technologies for Development and Integration of Novel Components for Open and Closed Loop Hormone Replacement Platforms for T1D Therapy.                    

*Date:*                         May 27, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Democracy II, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ryan G. Morris, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7015, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-594-4721,                         *ryan.morris@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: April 27, 2022.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-09403 Filed 5-2-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT N OT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED ASGEI RR ULFR , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 21

- 2270 LT Case No. 2018

- CF

- 1124

- A STAT E OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed May 23, 2023 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole C ounty , Melanie Chase, Judge. Matthew J

. Metz, Pu blic D efender, and George D. E. Burden, Assis tant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley M oody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, an d A llison L. Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, f or

A ppellee.

PER CURIAM. A FFIRMED.

LAMBERT , C.J. , EDWARDS an d EISNAUGLE , JJ. , c onc ur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk June 25, 2012

h0618 

# Order

June 25, 2012

144150

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 144150

COA: 304796

Shiawassee CC: 08

- 007856

- FH

RANDALL RAYMOND BALL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 8 , 2011

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Jesus GALLARZO, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6911.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Christopher Dineaa BATUOH, petitioner, v. Eddie MILES, Warden.

No. 17-6302.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 11/09/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      531,431
COMMITMENTS
  71,711   27,386  114,825  324,392  374,266  510,928  516,477   20,503   14,954

CHANGES FROM 11/02/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     24,081)
   3,222   -2,739    6,013   10,923   20,970   20,158   24,244    3,923     -163

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    13.5      5.2     21.6     61.0     70.4     96.1     97.2      3.9      2.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      135)
      43       14       47       64       72      125      120
```

----

Updated November 15, 2010
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Miron Markovitz, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of Lapis  Technologies,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

      (a)  designed  such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
disclosure  controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to
ensure that material  information  relating to the small business issuer is made
known to us by others,  particularly  during the period in which this  report is
being prepared;

      (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's  disclosure
controls and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and

      (c)  disclosed  in this report any change in the small  business  issuer's
internal  control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially  affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
the small  business  issuer's  board of  directors  (or persons  performing  the
equivalent functions);

      (a) all significant  deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely to  adversely  affect  the small  business  issuer's  ability  to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) any fraud, whether or not material,  that involves management or other
employees who have a significant  role in the small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.

May 16, 2005

/s/ Miron Markovitz
-----------------------------------
Miron Markovitz
Chief Financial Officer
Carol A. TRUFANT, petitioner, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 17M70.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 11, 2017.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Exhibit 32.1**Certification pursuant to****Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)**I, Eric R. Zimmerman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Dayton Superior Corporation (the“Company”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ending June 29, 2007 (the“Periodic Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) andThe information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: August 10, 2007              /s/ Eric R. Zimmerman   Eric R. Zimmerman   President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM US INDUSTRIAL
SERVICES,  INC.  FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED June 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN IT'S ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

                                  Page 18 of 18
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,507,479
<SECURITIES>                                 1,170,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,293,919
<ALLOWANCES>                                   313,614
<INVENTORY>                                    224,578
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,647,286
<PP&E>                                      16,112,304
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,234,519
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,970,752
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       38,905,435
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,019,246
<OTHER-SE>                                 (12,482,405)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,970,752
<SALES>                                     36,658,878
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            36,658,878
<CGS>                                       28,861,339
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               28,861,339
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,839,715
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,754,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,312,947
<INCOME-TAX>                                    49,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,263,947
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,263,947
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.49
        

</TABLE>
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-33,191-04

EX PARTE WILLIAM LLOYD MACEACHRAN, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. F39146-A IN THE 249 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM JOHNSON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of one count of

possession of controlled substance and one count of possession of certain chemicals with intent to

manufacture and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment in each count. 

Applicant contends, among other things, that his plea was involuntary because the plea

agreement is impossible to perform, leaving him illegally restrained. Applicant has alleged facts

that, if true, might entitle him to relief. In these circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we

held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the
2

appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court may use any means set out in TEX. CODE

CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the appropriate case, the trial court may rely on its personal

recollection. Id.

If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. 

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law in regard to Applicant’s

claim that a material stipulation in his guilty plea is impossible to perform. The court shall make

specific findings addressing whether Applicant understood that the proviso that the stipulation was

“subject to Chapter 508 of the Gov’t. Code” could mean that the terms of the stipulation could be

defeated by other aspects of the Government Code, such as the requirement conditioning mandatory

supervision release on the Board’s discretion or the provision allowing potential forfeiture of street

time. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and conclusions of law that it deems

relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must

be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court. 

Filed: August 22, 2018

Do not publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Form 
10-Q 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>                                      10,008,313
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,500,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               100,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 15,322,564
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                     125,747,945
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                       125,008,000
<LOANS>                                    207,051,465
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,677,321
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             370,986,847
<DEPOSITS>                                 302,350,186
<SHORT-TERM>                                14,616,652
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          6,765,283
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,500
<OTHER-SE>                                  47,220,226
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             370,986,847
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              9,348,763
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            4,061,236
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               662,089
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            14,072,088
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           5,471,002
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,772,600
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        8,299,488
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  300,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             111,583
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,593,886
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,086,869
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   4,086,869
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,573,339
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.79
<LOANS-NON>                                  6,470,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                 2,318,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,800,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  434,450
<RECOVERIES>                                    11,771
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,677,321
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           698,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      1,979,321
        

</TABLE>
Benjie Earl WRIGHT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6887.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.