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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheets and statements of income for Telos Corporation and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          2,781,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  52,474,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      925,000
<INVENTORY>                                    17,066,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               73,963,000
<PP&E>                                         36,876,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 20,390,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                110,064,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          57,601,000
<BONDS>                                        32,857,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          40,145,000
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           78,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    (33,308,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  110,064,000
<SALES>                                        85,220,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              188,895,000
<CGS>                                          76,798,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 168,281,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  647,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              5,668,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,555,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,739,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,816,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 12,024,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                    2,208,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           0
        


</TABLE>
# C_2007288EN.01000501.xml

| 30.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4810 — Moepfer International/Thyssen Krupp/Imperial Logistics/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 288/02)

On 23 November 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4810. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4810. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
# L_2007103EN.01004601.xml

| 20.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 103/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 103/46

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 430/2007

of 19 April 2007

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 38/2007

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1), and in particular the second subparagraph and point (b) of the third subparagraph of Article 33(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 38/2007 of 17 January 2007 opening a standing invitation to tender for the resale for export of sugar held by the intervention agencies of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Sweden (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 38/2007 of 17 January 2007 opening a standing invitation to tender for the resale for export of sugar held by the intervention agencies of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Sweden (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 38/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 18 April 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 38/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 18 April 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the partial invitation to tender ending on 18 April 2007, the maximum export refund for the product referred to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 38/2007 shall be 392,50 EUR/tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 April 2007.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 April 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 247/2007 (OJ L 69, 9.3.2007, p .3).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 11, 18.1.2007, p. 4. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 203/2007 (OJ L 61, 28.2.2006, p. 3).

2

---
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. REGINALD BLAKE GARNER

No. 7519SC472

(Filed 19 November 1975)

On *writ of certiorari*to review trial before *Exum, Judge.*Judgment entered 28 November 1973 in Superior Court, Randolph County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 19 September 1975.

*Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General William F. Briley, for the State.*

*Hugh B. Anderson for defendant appellant.*

ARNOLD, Judge.

The facts of this case are set forth fully in a companion case, *State v. Spinks,*No. 7519SC461, filed this day. Defendant Garner raises no assignments of error or questions that are not discussed in *State v. Spinks.*We find no prejudicial error in the trial.

No error.

Judges Morris and Hedrick concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 21

                       SUBSIDIARIES OF WMS INDUSTRIES INC.


Subsidiary                                       Jurisdiction of Incorporation

WMS Games Inc.                                   Delaware
WMS Gaming Inc.                                  Delaware
WMS Gaming (Nevada) Inc.                         Nevada
WMS Gaming (Canada) Ltd.                         New Brunswick, Canada
Fun House Games Inc.                             Delaware
Lenc-Smith Inc.                                  Delaware
Williams Electronics Games, Inc.                 Delaware
WMS Finance Inc.                                 Delaware
WMS Gaming International, S.L.                   Spain
WMS Gaming Australia PTY Ltd.                    Australia
WMS Gaming Sales Inc.                            Barbados
WMS Gaming Africa (Pty) Ltd.                     South Africa
Big Foot Software Research & Development         Nevada
Exhibit 10.8

                             Global Gold Mining, LLC
                   45 East Putnam Avenue o Greenwich, CT 06830
                      Tel: 203.422.2300 o Fax: 203.422.2330

                     Zarobyan 1/1 o Yerevan, Armenia 375009
                     Tel: 3741.58.98.56 o Fax: 3741.54.56.98


                                                              September 29, 2006

Mr. Simon Cleghorn
Yerevan, Armenia


Dear Simon:

         This letter agreement memorializes your resignation effective September
30, 2006 as Director of Exploration and Mining of Global Gold Mining, LLC
pursuant to your August 1, 2005 Employment Agreement, as amended August 1, 2006.
According to your August 1, 2005 restricted stock award, 15,000 of the total
45,000 shares of Global Gold Corporation have vested; according to your December
29, 2005 restricted stock award, none of the 10,000 shares awarded have vested.
Please return the certificates representing those awards, and the transfer agent
will be requested to issue you a new certificate for the 15,000 shares which
have vested.

         Effective October 1, 2006, you will be employed as "Senior Geologist
for Exploration," available for up to five working days per month, or as
mutually agreed. Your compensation will be based on actual days worked and will
be at the rate of $600 (USD) per day. Global Gold Mining shall pay income,
social security and other employment related taxes imposed by Armenian law, and
you will be subject to the employment terms and conditions applicable to the
general staff.

                                                              Sincerely,


                                                              Van Z. Krikorian,
                                                              Manager

Acknowledged and Agreed


Simon Cleghorn
ex_343274.htm


Exhibit 10.30


 


AMENDMENT ONE TO THE


FRANK’S INTERNATIONAL N.V.


AMENDED AND RESTATED U.S. EXECUTIVE CHANGE-IN-CONTROL 


SEVERANCE PLAN


 


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, Expro Group Holdings N.V (f/k/a Frank’s International N.V.) (the “Company”) previously adopted the Frank’s International N.V. Amended and Restated U.S. Executive Change in Control Severance Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of its qualifying employees;


 


WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to expand the group of employees eligible to receive benefits to include non-U.S. based executives; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company has the authority to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 7(e) thereof.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that effective October 1, 2021,


 


(a)         Section 2(h) of the Plan is hereby amended by revising Subsection (i) in its entirety, to be and read as follows:


 


“‎(i)‎         The individual must be a full-time salaried employee of the Employer who, at the time of selection and through ‎the date a Change in Control occurs, is (A) holding the title of Chief ‎Executive Officer (“CEO”); (B) serving as an executive officer who ‎reports directly to the CEO; (C) serving as any other senior vice president, ‎vice president, or executive vice president of the Employer who does not ‎report directly to the CEO; or (D) serving as any other full-time salaried ‎management employee of the Employer at the time of selection.‎;”


 


           (b)         “Company” as defined in the plan shall refer to “Expro Group Holdings N.V.”


 


************


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused the Plan to be executed in its name and on its behalf as of October 1, 2021 by a duly authorized officer.


 


	 	Expro Group Holdings N.V.	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Michael D. Jardon	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Its:	CEO	 
	 	 	 	 



 





1
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21579]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, October 18, 2005, 10 a.m. 
Meeting closed to the public. This meeting was rescheduled to Thursday, 
October 20, 2005, at 2:30 p.m.
* * * * *

DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, November 1, 2005 at 10 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, 
U.S.C.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.
* * * * *

DATE AND TIME: Thursday, November 3, 2005, at 10 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 

Correction and Approval of Minutes.
Advsory Opinion 2005-16: Fired Up! LLC, by counsel, Marc E. Elias and 
Brian G. Svoboda.
Advisory Opinion 2005-17; American Crystal Sugar Company and Red River 
Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association, by counsel, Jan Witold Baran.
Final Audit Report on the Jim Gerlach of Congress Committee.
Routine Administrative Matters.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Darlene Harris,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-21579 Filed 10-25-05; 2:53 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
Exhibit 10.20


 


 



    	 	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	 



     


    

 


 


 



    	 	29	 



     


    

 

 


 



    	 	30	 



     


    

 


 


 



    	 	31	 



     


    

 


 


 



    	 	32
Kenneth S. Apfel has been appointed to serve as Commissioner of Social

*

Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

43(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-2128

___________

Douglas D. Dorsey, Jr., *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* Western District of Arkansas.

Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of *

Social Security, * [UNPUBLISHED] *

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: December 30, 1997 

 Filed: January 8, 1998

___________

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
The Honorable Beverly R. Stites, United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

Douglas D. Dorsey, Jr. appeals the district court&s decision affirming the

1

Commissioner’s partially unfavorable decision granting only a closed period of

disability insurance benefits from June 10, 1993, through August 8, 1994.

We affirm the Commissioner&s denial of benefits where substantial evidence on

the record as a whole supports the decision. See Piepgras v. Chater, 76 F.3d 233, 236

(8th Cir. 1996). First, we note Dorsey incorrectly argues that the administrative law

judge (ALJ) was required to assess his disability after August 8, 1994, under the

medical improvements standard; that standard does not apply where, as here, disability,

its extent, and its duration are determined in a single decision. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(f);

Ness v. Sullivan, 904 F.2d 432, 435 n.4 (8th Cir. 1990); Camp v. Heckler, 780 F.2d

721, 721-22 (8th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). 

We conclude substantial evidence supports the ALJ&s decision. The ALJ

properly evaluated Dorsey&s subjective complaints, and his conclusions regarding the

extent of Dorsey&s pain are supported by the record, including the opinions of Dorsey&s

treating physician. See Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984)

(factors); Jones v. Callahan, 122 F.3d 1148, 1153 (8th Cir. 1997) (question is not

whether claimant suffers from pain, but whether claimant is “fully credible when he

claims that his back hurts so much that it prevents him from engaging in gainful

activity”). We find no merit to Dorsey&s arguments that the ALJ failed to consider

Dorsey&s impairments in combination, see Browning v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 817, 821

(8th Cir. 1992), or that the hypothetical posed to the vocational expert (VE) was

defective. See Roberts v. Heckler, 783 F.2d 110, 112 (8th Cir.1985) (per curiam)

(“hypothetical is sufficient if it sets forth the impairments which are accepted as true”);
-3-

see also Roe v. Chater, 92 F.3d 672, 675 (8th Cir. 1996) (VE testimony based on

proper hypothetical question constitutes substantial evidence).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
SCWC-22-0000591

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

_______________________________________________________________

ESTATE OF VIVIAN T. LORD, by her PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE 

WILLIAM H. GILLIAM; and WILLIAM H. GILLIAM individually, 

Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants,

vs.

LESLIE KOBATA, REGISTRAR, in his 

official capacity only; PORTER McGUIRE KIAKONA & CHOW, LLP; 

PORTER McGUIRE KIAKONA, LLP; FOREST B. JENKINS; 

CHONG, NISHIMOTO, SIA, NAKAMURA & GOYA, LLLP; JEFFREY H.K. SIA; 

DOROTHY P.H. MEISNER; SHANA MAGUIRE; HAWAII FIRST, INC.; 

CERTIFIED MANAGEMENT, INC., dba ASSOCIA, HAWAII; and

ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KUHIO SHORES AT POIPU, 

Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

___________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-22-0000591; CIV. NO. 1CCV-22-0000508)

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, and Eddins, JJ., 

Circuit Judge Castagnetti, in place of Nakayama, J., recused,

and Circuit Judge Souza, in place of Wilson, J., recused)

Upon consideration of the document filed on February 

21, 2023, it is ordered:

1. The application for a writ of certiorari is 

rejected.

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-22-0000591

18-APR-2023

11:02 AM

Dkt. 25 ORD
2

2. The petition for a writ of mandamus or 

prohibition is denied. Petitioners have alternative means to 

seek relief because 1CCV-22-0000508 is ongoing and the vexatious 

litigant order and order addressing attorney fees and costs may 

be reviewed on appeal. Petitioners have also not demonstrated a 

clear and indisputable right to relief because it is within the 

circuit court’s jurisdiction and discretion to decide the motion 

for attorney fees and costs. An extraordinary writ is thus not 

warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawaiʻi 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 

334, 338-39 (1999); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 

237, 241–42, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978).

3. The request for a stay is denied. If and when

appropriate, Petitioners may seek a stay in the circuit court 

pursuant to Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 62 and Hawaiʻi 

Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 8.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, April 18, 2023.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

/s/ Jeannette H. Castagnetti

/s/ Kevin A.K. Souza
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,117
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,724,222
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,739,339)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  (15,117)
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,117
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,117)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,117)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,117)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>