alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exh_109.htm


Exhibit 10.9


 


2013 SALES INCENTIVE PLAN


 


Irv Alpert


 







 


There are three components to this plan:


 


Monthly Enterprise Bonus


 


A bonus can be earned each month for achievement against the enterprise bookings plan.  The bonus is calculated as follows:


 


1.           Bonus is based on total enterprise bookings, acquisition and retention, against plan.


 


2.           Minimum commission is earned when 85% of the total monthly bookings plan is achieved.


 


3.           Target bonus is earned when 100% of the total monthly bookings plan is achieved.


 


4.           The bonus earned between 85% and 100% plan achievement is prorated between the minimum and target bonus.


 


5.           An additional 10% bonus is earned for each dollar over the total monthly bookings plan.


 


Annual Channel Retention Bonus


 


If the current book of business in Channel sales at December 31, 2013 is at minimum the contract value as of January 1, 2013, a retention bonus will be paid.  A monthly draw will be provided against this bonus throughout the year.  The draw may be suspended at any time during the year if the contract value falls 5% below the minimum target (or 95% of original contract value) at management’s discretion.  If a current customer is lost, the dollars can be recovered from growth from another current customer as of January 1, 2013.  2012 Channel book of business includes all royalties and fees paid on existing contracts in 2012.


 


Monthly Channel New Business Commission


 


A 10% commission is earned on all new channel business (new customers as of January 1, 2013) during the month the business is contracted.  Channel is defined as any content license to a third party or a franchise client.
#### Ivan L. MENDEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 12-7706.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 20, 2012.

Decided: Dec. 27, 2012.

Ivan L. Mendez, Appellant Pro Se.

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ivan L. Mendez appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. *Mendez v. Unknown,*No. l:12-cv-00917-LMB-TRJ (E.D.Va. Aug. 31, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3

                       [Letterhead of Chien Chyuan & Co.]

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-92076 on Form S-8 of our report on CWI International China, Inc. financial
statements and report as to the schedules included in the Annual Report on Form
10-K of Waxman Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended June 30,
2003.

/s/ Chien Chyuan & Co.
Chien Chyuan & Co,
Certified Public Accountants

August 15, 2003
Taichung, Taiwan
No. 1069.

#### Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. *v.*United States.

May 27, 1946.

*William S. Hammers*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath, Assistant Attor*
      *853
      *ney General Sonnett, Paul A. Sweeney*and *Joseph B. Goldman*for the United States.

*852Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Claims denied.
EXHIBIT 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

In connection with the Annual Report of The Washington Post Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3,
2010 (the Report), Donald E. Graham, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of the Company, and Hal S. Jones, Senior Vice PresidentFinance (principal financial officer) of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.



|                    |  |                                           
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|                    | 
|Date: March 1, 2010 |  | /s/ Donald E. Graham                      
|                    |  | Donald E. Graham Chief Executive Officer  
|                    | 
|Date: March 1, 2010 |  | /s/ Hal S. Jones                          
|                    |  | Hal S. Jones Senior Vice PresidentFinance
#### SINGER MFG. CO. et al. v. SHEPARD et al.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Dec. 3, 1952.

Burgess, Ryan & Hicks, New York City,, for plaintiffs.

Demov, Callahan & Morris, New York City, for defendants.

BONDY, District Judge.

This is a motion by the defendants for leave to amend their original answer so as-to include a denial of an allegation of paragraph 21 of the complaint, stated to have-been omitted through defendants’ inadvertence, and for leave to amend their answer so as to include two counterclaims-not previously asserted.

*510The plaintiffs do not object to the defendants’ motion to amend their answer to include the denial of the allegations in paragraph 21 of the complaint. They object however to defendants’ motion to set up the two counterclaims in their answer.

The defendants have delayed two and one-half years since their answer was filed in asserting any counterclaims, and delayed almost three years since the complaint was filed. They assert, as an excuse, that they hoped and expected that pending negotiations would result in a settlement of the action, in view of the fact that plaintiff settled similar actions against the defendants in the past. Such hope and expectation do not justify the delay in the filing of the counterclaims, since, as admitted the defendants knew that such counterclaims existed and might have been pleaded. The defendants allege, as a further excuse for the delay, that many months were needed to ascertain the facts and law involved in the counterclaims. This investigation should have been begun when knowledge of the counterclaims first came to their attention and should not have been delayed as they were until after the negotiations were unsuccessfully terminated.

Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. rule 13(f), 28 U.S. C.A., provides that when a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or when justice requires, he may by leave of the court set up the counterclaim by amendment.

The defendants’ delay was not due to any oversight or inadvertence but to inexcusable neglect. However, justice requires that they be allowed to assert these counterclaims at this time provided the trial of the action is not thereby delayed.

Leave to amend the answer so as to include a denial of paragraph 21 of the complaint and to include the two counterclaims is granted on the condition that the existing date of issue April 27, 1950 shall remain unchanged.
Exhibit 15.1
   October 26, 2001

   Stratus Properties Inc.
   98 San Jacinto Blvd.
   Austin, TX  78701

   Gentlemen:

   We are aware that Stratus Properties Inc. has incorporated by reference
   in its Registration Statements (File Nos. 33-78798, 333-31059 and 333-
   52995) its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001, which
   includes our report dated October 26, 2001 covering the unaudited
   interim financial information contained therein. Pursuant to Regulation
   C of  the Securities Act of 1933 (the Act), this report is not
   considered a part of the registration statements prepared or certified
   by our firm or a report prepared or certified by our firm within the
   meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


   Very truly yours,

   /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
EX 10.2 Q113




Exhibit 10.2
Amendment Agreement


This Amendment Agreement (the "Amendment") is made as of December 31, 2012 and further amends the letter agreement dated December 28, 2004, as amended (the “Letter Agreement"), between you and IHS Inc. (the “Company''), containing the terms and conditions of your employment with the Company.


		
	1.
	The. third sentence of Section 9 of the Letter Agreement (Release) beginning with “lf you execute  such a  release  within such 60 day  period” is  hereby deleted  and replaced in its entirety with the following:




"If you execute such a release within such 60 day period, the lump-sum payment under Section 7(a)(i) and (ii) or under Section 8(a)(i) or (ii), as applicable, will be made  within the  60 day  period  from  the date  of  your  separation  from service, following the execution of such release; provided that any payments under this Letter Agreement that could be paid during a period that begins in one taxable year and ends in the subsequent taxable year shall be paid in the subsequent taxable year."


		
	2.
	Except as expressly amended herein, the Letter Agreement remains in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.




	
		
	 
	IHS INC.


         /s/ Jeffrey Sisson
By: _______________________
Jeffrey Sisson
Senior Vice President
Chief Human Resources Officer

	Accepted and Agreed:


/s/  Scott Key
________________________
Employee Name:  Scott Key
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-20-00115-CR

XAVIER LAVAR FRENCH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 202nd District Court

Bowie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17F1141-202

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and Carter,* JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss

_____________________________

*Jack Carter, Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In 2018, Xavier Lavar French had pled guilty to evading arrest using a vehicle. See TEX.

PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.04. At that time, he was placed on deferred adjudication community

supervision. On September 30, 2020, the trial court adjudicated French’s guilt, revoked his 

community supervision, and sentenced French to eight years’ confinement. In that proceeding,

the trial court also adjudicated, revoked, and sentenced French for another felony. We address 

that case in our cause number 06-20-00114-CR.

Our opinion in French v. State, 06-20-00114-CR, also issued today, addresses the issues 

raised by French in this instant case. For the same reasons stated in that opinion, we affirm the 

trial court’s judgment and sentence in this cause.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: June 15, 2021

Date Decided: July 21, 2021

Do Not Publish
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00047

- CV

CHARLES MOORHEAD

v. DAHLIA REYES, ET AL.
On Appeal from the 343rd District Court of Bee County , Texas Trial Cause No. B

- 18

- 1160

- CV

- C

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this ca use on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decision certified below for observance. June 6, 2019
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-1A of our
report dated December 2, 2002, relating to the financial statements and
financial highlights of Capital Income Builder, Inc., which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the references to us under the
headings "Financial Highlights", "Independent Accountants", and "Prospectuses,
Reports to Shareholders and Proxy Statements" in such Registration Statement.



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Los Angeles, California
December 26, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 992 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 992

 To amend the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 to 
                 inform union members of their rights.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 27, 2003

Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas (for himself, Mr. Ballenger, Mr. Norwood, Mr. 
 McKeon, Mr. Carter, and Mrs. Musgrave) introduced the following bill; 
   which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 to 
                 inform union members of their rights.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Union Members Right-to-Know Act''.

SEC. 2. INFORMATION.

    Section 105 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 
1959 (29 U.S.C. 415) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``A 
labor organization shall provide such information--
            ``(1) to each new member within 90 days after the member 
        has joined the labor organization; and
            ``(2) periodically to all members in a manner which the 
        Secretary of Labor determines will promote a fuller 
        understanding of the member's rights and judicial remedies 
        under this Act.''.

SEC. 3. REGULATIONS.

    Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary of Labor shall review and revise all regulations 
promulgated before such date to implement the amendments made in this 
Act to the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Stebbins B. Chandor, Jr., certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of iPCS, 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 officer 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:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



|Date: December 28, 2004                                                                                             | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|/s/STEBBINS B. CHANDOR, JR.Stebbins B. Chandor, Jr.
Executive Vice President Operations and Chief Financial Officer | 

---



QuickLinks
EX 10.1 Q113






Exhibit 10.1


Summary of Nonemployee Director Compensation Program
IHS Inc.


Director Compensation
Our nonemployee directors receive compensation for their service on our Board.  The compensation is comprised of annual cash retainers and equity awards, as described in the table below.  The Board Retainer and certain other retainers may be converted into deferred stock units or deferred under the IHS Inc. 2004 Directors Stock Plan ("Directors Stock Plan").  In addition, our nonemployee directors are reimbursed for reasonable expenses. 


	
			
	Annual Director Compensation
	 
	$

	Board Retainer
	 
	90,000

	Committee Chair Retainer:
	 
	 

	Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
	 
	17,500

	All Other Committees
	 
	30,000

	Committee Member Retainer:
	 
	 

	Audit Committee
	 
	15,000

	All Other Committees
	 
	10,000

	Lead Independent Director Retainer
	 
	30,000

	Annual Equity Award (1)
	 
	150,000

	 
	 
	 

	(1) On December 1 of each year of service, each nonemployee director shall receive an award consisting of restricted stock units whose underlying shares shall have, on the date of grant, a fair market value equal to $150,000.  The award has a one-year vesting period.  Directors may choose to defer receipt of the shares underlying the RSUs until after their termination of service.
	 
	 






Each nonemployee director shall receive on the date he or she is elected to the Board for the first time a one-time award consisting of restricted stock units whose underlying shares will have, on the date of grant, a fair market value (as defined in the plan) equal to $150,000 (rounded to the nearest whole number of shares). The award has a one-year vesting period.  Directors may choose to defer receipt of the shares underlying the RSUs until after their termination of service.
All equity awards for nonemployee directors will be issued pursuant to the IHS Inc. 2004 Directors Stock Plan. 
We provide liability insurance for our directors and officers.
Exhibit 32a

                Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of Web Press Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Gary B. Palmer, Chairman of the Board of Directors and 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.

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.


Date:  March 5, 2004                        /s/Gary B. Palmer
                                            -----------------------
                                            Gary B. Palmer
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                            (Chief Executive Officer)
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-151149, 333-117395, 333-64256, 333-41247, 33-90972, 33-43174) and Form S-3 (No. 333-98041, 333-63890) of WD-40 Company of our report dated October 22, 2012
relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Diego,
California

October 22, 2012
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, 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 May 1, 2013

s0424 

# Order

May 1, 2013

146340

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146340

COA: 309540

Wayne CC: 11

- 008326

- FH

SHAKEISHA NICHOLE HALL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 22, 2012

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
H. Res. 221

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

May 8, 2003.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1261) to enhance the workforce investment system of the Nation by strengthening one-stop career centers,

providing for more effective governance arrangements, promoting access to a more comprehensive array of employment,

training, and related services, establishing a targeted approach to serving youth, and improving performance accountability, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill

shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to

the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and

controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of

the Committee on Education and the Workforce. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under

the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an

original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-
2

•HRES 221 EH

minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and the Workforce now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in

the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. No

amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a

substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report

of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution.

Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in

the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in

the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for

the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled

by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to

amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division

of the question in the House or in the Committee of the

Whole. All points of order against such amendments are

waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to

the House with such amendments as may have been adopted.

Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on

any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to

the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a

substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
3

•HRES 221 EH

without intervening motion except one motion to recommit

with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
# table12full02

&8Page &P of &N