alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT      10.36**

----

----

**EMPLOYMENT      AGREEMENT**

**WITNESSETH:**

**1.**
**Employment**

**2.**
**Term**

**3.**
**Compensation**

----

**4.**
**Executive      Benefits**

----

**5.**
**Termination      Date; Consequences for Compensation and Benefits**

|  | 5.1.2. | The                date of Executive's death. |
|--|--------|-----------------------------------------------|

|  | 5.1.3. | The                date of Executive's voluntary resignation after one of the following                events shall have occurred, |
|--|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----

** **

**6.**
**Indemnification**

**7.**
**Agreement      Not to Compete**

----

**8.**
**Agreement        Not to Solicit**

**9.**
**Confidential      Information**

**10.**
**Arbitration**

**11.**
**Miscellaneous**

----

*signature      page follows*

|  EXECUTIVE:      |                                  |  COMPANY: |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------|----------------|
|                  |                                  |           |
|  By:   |  /s/ Stephen              Seiler |           |  By: |  /s/ Jeffrey              B. Davis |
|                  |  Stephen Seiler                  |           |   |  Name: Jeffrey B. Davis |
|                  |                                  |           |   |  Title: Chairman of the Board |
|                  |                                  |           |   |   |
Exhibit
15.2


CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 
 We have issued our
report dated April 27, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Construtora Tenda S.A. as of December 31, 2008, and for the period
from October 22, 2008 through December 31, 2008, included in the Annual Report
of Gafisa S.A. on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009.  We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration Statement of Gafisa S.A. on Form F-3 (File No. 333-159803,
effective June 5, 2009).
 
 
 /s/ Terco Grant Thornton
Auditores Independentes
 São Paulo, SP,
Brazil
 March  10,
2010
exv10w1



 





Exhibit 10.1




April 25, 2007




Board of Directors

TBX Resources, Inc.




     Re:      Letter Amendment to the Employment Agreement of Tim Burroughs


To the Board:




     This letter is to advise you that I have agreed to an amendment to my current amended
Employment Agreement dated August 5, 2005 ( the “Agreement”).



     The Agreement currently provides that I, at my sole election, may call for 50,000 options to
be issued to me each year for five years beginning with the fiscal year ended November 30, 2005
To be eligible to call and receive the options, I must be vested in my employment for a three year
service period. I am currently eligible to call for options in fiscal years ended November 30,
2005 and 2006.



     I believe it would be in the best interests of TBX and its stockholders to amend the Agreement
to delete my ability to call any options for fiscal years 2005 and 2006, and I agree to this
amendment. I would retain my ability to call for options to be issued in fiscal years 2007 through
2009.



     In recognition of my long standing service to TBX and as consideration for my surrender of the
above-described call options, TBX will agree to a further amendment of the Agreement, whereby the
three year service period is hereby deleted.



     If the aforementioned amendment is agreeable, please signify by executing this letter
amendment in the space provided below.



Sincerely,




/s/ Tim Burroughs



Tim Burroughs




UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED:




	 	 	 
	/s/ Jeff Reynolds
 

on behalf of the Board of Directors of

	,	 
	TBX Resources, Inc.
From: The District Court of the 20th Judicial District. County of Lake.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, *20Plaintiff, vs. BEATRICE KRUSE, Defendant,

CAUSE NO. DC-07-94 DECISION

On December 3, 2008, the defendant was sentenced to a commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a period of eight (8) years, with six (6) years suspended, for the offense of Count I: Criminal Possession with Intent to Distribute, a felony.

On April 3, 2009, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant appeared via video conference and was represented by Eric Olson. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that she understood this and stated that she wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 3rd day of April, 2009.

DATED this 21st day of April, 2009.

Chairperson, Hon. Stewart Stadler, Member, Hon. Blair Jones and Member, Hon. Richard Simonton.
#### Surjit SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-75251.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 18, 2006.

*133Anthony Nwosu, Esq., Law Offices of Anthony Nwosu, Emeryville, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Surjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Gonz*alez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft,*336 F.3d 995, 998 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that government rebutted the presumption that petitioner has a well-founded fear of future persecution in India. The 2002 State Department report, and other reports submitted by petitioner, state that: conditions in Punjab have vastly improved, violence is much reduced, there is no militant activity generally, and even former militants now live a normal life in Punjab. Based on these reports, as well as the fact that petitioner’s brother-in-law, who was arrested with petitioner in 1993, has safely remained in India, and the fact that petitioner lived safely in Bombay for over a year after his last arrest, his asylum claim fails. *See id.*at 998-99.

Because petitioner did not establish that he was eligible for asylum, he necessarily fails to establish withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

Petitioner also fails to establish a CAT claim because he did not show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he was returned to India. *See Malhi v. INS,*336 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### State v. Wilson

Case below: 183 N.C. App. - (1 May 2007)

No. 257A07

1. Def’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Stay (COA06-509)

2. Def’s Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

1. Allowed 06/11/07 361 N.C. 437

2. Allowed 08/28/07
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          48,772
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,931
<OTHER-SE>                                     (50,703)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,322
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,322)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,322)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,322)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
Order entered January 29 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00975
- CV
IN RE: THE BIG 12 CONFE RENCE, INC. Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 18
- 00585
- A



### O RDER Before Justices Bridges and Brown 1 Before the Court is real party in interest Kolby Listenbee’s motion for immediate temporary suspension of December 21, 2018 order and for clarification. We DENY his motion. The trial court’s January 3, 2019 order vacating its July 23, 2018 order denying re l a tors’ plea in abatement and granting relators’ plea in abatement effectively abated the underlying proceeding

.
/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE

1 Ju stice Boatright was originally on the panel; however, as of January 1, 2019, he is no longer a justice on the Court and did not participate in deciding this motion

.
##### 



SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
   FORM 6-K Report of Foreign Private Issuer Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the month of May, 2005   Rogers Communications Inc. 
 333 Bloor Street East
10th Floor
Toronto, Ontario M4W 1G9
Canada 
 Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of
Form 20-F or Form 40-F: Form 20-F     o
    
    Form 40-F     þ
 Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this
Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes     o
    
    No     þ




---



##### 



Signatures Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC.By:
    /s/ Graeme McPhailName:
    Graeme McPhailTitle:
    Vice President, Associate General Counsel Date: May 20, 2005   Exhibit Index Exhibit Number
    
    Description99.1
    
    
    Notice of Annual General Meeting of Shareholders and
Information Circular dated May 1, 2005
Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements



 Exhibit 10.37 
 NIMBLEGEN SYSTEMS, INC. 
 COMPENSATION OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
 Non-employee directors will receive the following compensation for their service on the Board of Directors. However, for any non-employee director who serves on the
Board of Directors as a designee of a shareholder or group of shareholders under the Company’s Stockholders Agreement, this compensation arrangement will not take effect until the closing of the Company’s initial public offering.

 Cash compensation 
  

			
	 •        Annual cash retainer:
	  	$25,000 per year
		
	 •        Additional cash retainer for committee service:
	  	$3,000 per year for each committee on which a director serves, unless the director chairs the committee
		
		  	$5,000 per year for each committee chaired by a director
		
	 •        Additional fees and expenses:
	  	$1,500 per board or committee meeting attended in person or telephonically, plus expenses for attending the meeting
	
	 •        The annual cash retainer (including the retainer for committee service) will
be paid quarterly in arrears within two weeks following the last day of each calendar quarter, together with meeting fees and expenses for each meeting held during the quarter. For a director serving less than the full quarter (or otherwise not
eligible to receive the retainer for the full quarter), the retainer for that quarter will be a prorated amount.


 Equity compensation 
 Effective upon a director’s commencement of service on the Board of Directors (or upon becoming eligible to participate in this compensation program), each non-employee director will be granted an option to purchase 25,000 shares of
common stock of the Company. On the third anniversary of this initial date of grant, and thereafter on each succeeding third anniversary, each non-employee director who is still a non-employee director at that time will be granted another option to
purchase 25,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. Each such option will vest proportionately over the three years following the date of grant in installments on the last day of each calendar quarter during the three-year period. Upon a
director’s termination of service as a director, an option will be forfeited to the extent unvested at that time. Each such option also will have the following terms: 
  

	(1)	The option will have an exercise price per share equal to the fair market value per share of such stock as of the date of grant. 









	(2)	The option will be exercisable only to the extent vested. 

  

	(3)	Any option to the extent unvested will immediately vest upon a change of control of the Company. 

  

	(4)	The option will have an expiration date of ten years after the date of grant. 

  

	(5)	The option will be otherwise subject to the terms of the plan under which granted. 

  

 2
----

EXHIBIT 99.1

 

CERTIFICATIONS

 

I, Arthur D. Levinson, certify that:

            1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Genentech, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

            4.   The registrant's other certifying officers 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 registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

       b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures 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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

            5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant'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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:
  July 22, 2003 
By:
/s/ARTHUR D. LEVINSON    
Arthur D. Levinson, Ph.D.
#### Burgin v. Owen

Case below: 181 N.C. App. 511

No. 189P07

Pit’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to Review Decision of the COA (COA06-450)

Denied 10/11/07
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-29-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                         161,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,285,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,483,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,031,000
<PP&E>                                       4,150,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,330,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,935,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,158,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,583,000
<COMMON>                                     3,105,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,266,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,935,000
<SALES>                                      4,096,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,096,000
<CGS>                                        2,194,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,728,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                357,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            357,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   357,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        




</TABLE>
** **

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

 

Form 10-Q

 

(MarkOne)

[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TOSECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010

 

or

 

[]   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THESECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

 

For the transition period from _________to _________

 

Commission file number 0-10412

 

 

NATIONAL PROPERTY INVESTORS4 

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089

Greenville, South Carolina  29602

(Address of principal executive offices)

 

(864) 239-1000

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to befiled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during thepreceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was requiredto file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements forthe past 90 days.  

[X]Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted onits corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to besubmitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of thischapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that theregistrant was required to submit and post such files). [ ] Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, anaccelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reportingcompany.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “acceleratedfiler” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act). [ ] Yes  [X] No