alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Description of Long-Term Disability Arrangements



 Exhibit 10.17 
 DESCRIPTION OF LONG-TERM DISABILITY ARRANGEMENTS 
 The Company makes available an executive
disability coverage program to provide disability benefits to the named executive officers and other management employees. The executive disability coverage is designed to replace 66 2/3 % of the base salary, bonuses and
incentive compensation of the employee up to a maximum of $25,000 per month benefit. Under the executive disability coverage, the employee pays for the premiums. 
 In addition to the above coverage, the Company provides supplemental disability coverage for David S. Haffner and Karl G. Glassman under various policies. This supplemental disability coverage provides
the following benefits: 
  

													
	 Name
	  	Annual Premiums*	 	  	Monthly Benefit	 	  	Benefit Period	 
	 David S. Haffner
	  	$	4,874	  	  	$	16,300	  	  	 	Until Age 65	  
	 Karl G. Glassman
	  	$	1,185	  	  	$	4,200	  	  	 	Until Age 65	  

  

	*	Under the supplemental disability coverage, the Company pays for the premium.
exv10w13






Exhibit 10.13




AMENDMENT NO. 2

TO

2004 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

OF NUVASIVE, INC.




Effective November 4, 2010



     WHEREAS, the Company has previously adopted the 2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended
(the “2004 ESPP”); and



     WHEREAS, this amendment to the 2004 ESPP (this “Amendment”) on November 4, 2010 (the
“Effective Date”) was adopted in accordance with Section 26 of the 2004 ESPP;



     NOW THEREFORE, the 2004 ESPP is amended as follows:



     1. Effective as of the Effective Date, Section 10(a) of the 2004 ESPP is amended in its
entirety to read as follows:




A participant may decrease the rate of payroll deductions during an
Offering Period by filing with the Company a new authorization for
payroll deductions, in which case the new rate shall become effective
for the next payroll period commencing after the Company’s receipt of
the authorization and shall continue for the remainder of the Offering
Period unless changed as described below. Such change in the rate of
payroll deductions may be made at any time during an Offering Period,
but not more than one (1) change may be made effective during any
Purchase Period. Except as otherwise provided by the Committee, a
participant shall not be entitled to increase his or her rate of payroll
deductions during a Purchase Period. A participant may increase or
decrease the rate of payroll deductions for any subsequent Purchase
Period by filing with the Company a new authorization for payroll
deductions prior to the beginning of such Purchase Period, or such other
time period as specified by the Committee.



     2. Except as amended by this Amendment, the 2004 ESPP shall remain unchanged and in
full force and effect.



     3. Except as otherwise provided in this Amendment, terms used herein shall have the
meanings ascribed to such terms in the 2004 ESPP.
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, James M. Uveges, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

(1)   I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Carrollton Bancorp;

(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 in order 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;



(5)   The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):



|Date: March 1, 2006 |  |  | /s/JAMES M. UVEGESJames M. Uveges Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|------------------- |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

69

---
Exhibit 32.1  SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION  In connection with the annual report of Changing Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Omar Durham, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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; and2.The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.   Date: October 14, 2014BY: /s/ Omar DurhamOmar DurhamCEO, ChairmanPrincipal Executive Officer andPrincipal Financial and Accounting Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 21.1

HAYNES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Haynes
International, Inc.
        Parent company

Haynes
Wire Company
        (Wholly owned subsidiary in Mountain Home, North Carolina)

Haynes
International, Ltd.
        (Wholly owned subsidiary in Openshaw, England)

Haynes
International, S.A.R.L.
        (Wholly owned subsidiary in Paris, France)

Nickel-Contor
AG
        (Wholly owned subsidiary in Zurich, Switzerland)

Haynes
International, S.r.l.
                (Wholly owned subsidiary of Nickel-Contor in Italy)

Haynes
Pacific Pte Ltd
        (Wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore)

Haynes
International (China) Ltd.
                (Wholly owned subsidiary of Haynes Pacific Pte. Ltd.)

Haynes
International, Inc. India Branch Office
        (Wholly owned Branch Office in India)

Haynes
Sour Gas Tubulars, Inc.
        (Wholly owned subsidiary, Inactive)

Haynes
Specialty Steels Company
        (Wholly owned subsidiary, Inactive)

---



QuickLinks
----

**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF      FINANCIAL OFFICER**

| /s/                L.                Paul Latham                                                                                                  |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| L.                Paul Latham                                                                                                                     |
| President                and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                              |
| of                Southwest Royalties, Inc., the                                                                                                  |
| Managing                General Partner of                                                                                                        |
| Southwest                Royalties Institutional Income Fund X-B,                L.P.                                                             |
|                                                                                                                                              |
| <?xml:namespace                prefix = st1 ns =                "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />April 5,                2007 |
|                                                                                                                                              |
|                                                                                                                                              |
| /s/                Mel                G. Riggs                                                                                                    |
| Mel                G.                Riggs                                                                                                        |
| Vice                President and Chief Financial Officer of                                                                                      |
| Southwest                Royalties, Inc., the                                                                                                     |
| Managing                General Partner of                                                                                                        |
| Southwest                Royalties Institutional Income Fund X-B,                L.P.                                                             |
|                                                                                                                                              |
| April                5, 2007                                                                                                                      |
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 16

- 00076

- CR

IN RE LOUANNE LARSON

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Louanne Larson has petitioned this Court for mandamus relief. Larson complains that the district clerk either did not send the complete record or sent the wrong record to this Court when Larson appealed the trial court’s most recent denial of DNA testing. See Larson v. State , 06

- 15

- 00178

- CR, 2016 WL 1268003 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana Apr. 1, 2016 , pet. ref’d ). Specifically , Larson claims that an affidavit was not included in the appellate record provided to this Court for that appeal. Larson would have this Court compel the Marion County District Clerk
to send this Court documents

— a motion f or DNA testing, an affidavit, and some exhibits

— that were filed in the trial court in Larson’s request for DNA testing. Our jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus is constrained by statute. We may issue a writ of mandamus only against a “judge of a d istrict or county court in the court of appeals district” or when “necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of the court.” T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221 (West 2004). W e could grant Larson’s request only if mandamus were necessary to enforce this Court’s jur isdiction. From the context of her petition , we infer that Larson is complaining about our recent opinion on her appeal from the trial court’s denial of her request for DNA testing. This Court acquired jurisdiction over that appeal and issued an opinion . Thus , there is no question of enforcing our jurisdiction. Larson has not explained how mandamus is necessary to enforce this Court’s jurisdiction. 1 The respondent, the Marion Cou n t y District Clerk, is not a judge of a district court or county court

1 For example, in Click v. Tyra , 867 S.W.2d 406 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1993 , no pet. ) , the a ppellant s posted a cash deposit in lieu of an appeal bond to perfect their appeal; the district clerk refused to provide an appellate record3

in the Sixth Appellate District of the State of Texas and hence is not subject to our mandamus jurisdiction under Section 22.221(b)(1) of the Texas Government Code . Mandamus not being “necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of” this Court, we have no auth ority to grant the re lief sought.
See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221(a)

. W e deny Larson’s petition. Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice
Date Submitted: May 3 , 2016 Date Decided: May 4 , 2016
Do Not Publish

until appell ants paid the record fee in cash. The reviewing court held that the clerk could not require this additional payment, a cash deposit having been posted. The appellate court entertained and granted the request f or mandamus relief “[t]o protect [their] appe llate jurisdiction and to insure the integrity of the appellate process. ” Id. at 407

.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 19

- 10573

**consolidated with** No. 19

**- 10782**  Summary Calendar

**Christopher Wooten,**

Plaintiff

— Appellant **,**

versus

**Stan Parker,** Howard County Sheriff **; Timothy D. Yeats,**  Howard County Judge, 118th District **; Colleen Barton,**  Howard County District Clerk **; FNU Averett,**  Howard County Deputy Sheriff **; FNU Buchanan,**  Howard County Deputy Sheriff **; Robert H. Moore, III,**  Judge **; Timothy Green,**  Magistrate, Howard County **; FNU Green,**  Judge, Howard County **,**
Defendants

— Appellees

**.**

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 1:17

- CV

- 12 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 1, 2020
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-10573 Document: 00515655921 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/01/2020No. 19

- 10573 No. 19

- 10782

2 Before **King, Smith,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *
Christopher Wooten, Texas prisoner # 2089854 , appeal s the dis mis

sal without prejudice , under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) , of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint and the denial of his post judgment motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). We review both for abuse of discre

tion. See Coleman v. Sweetin , 745 F.3d 756, 766 (5th Cir. 2014) ; Wilson v.
Johns

- Manville Sales Corp. , 873 F.2d 869, 871 (5th Cir. 198 9).
On appeal, Wooten primarily realleges the substantive claims that he
asserted in his § 1983 complaint . He does not discuss the application of
Rule 41(b) or otherwise meaningfully address the reasons why his complaint
was dismissed or his Rule 60(b) mo tion was denied. Though we review pro se briefs with the benefit of liberal construction, see Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must brief their arguments to preserve them, see Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224

− 25 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann
v. Dall

. C n ty. Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). By not identifying an error in the disposition of his § 1983 complaint or Rule 60(b) motion, Wooten has abandoned any claim related to those rulings. Se e Yohey , 985 F.2d at 224

− 25; Brinkmann , 813 F.2d at 748

. Thus, the judgment is **AFFIRMED** . Wooten’s motion for appoint

ment of counsel is **DENIED** because he has not demonstrated exceptional
circumstances. See Naranjo v. Thompson , 809 F.3d 793, 799 (5th Cir. 2015).

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opin

ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. Case: 19-10573 Document: 00515655921 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/01/2020
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2947 

To provide for the release of the reversionary interest held by the United 

States in certain land conveyed by the United States in 1950 for the 

establishment of an airport in Cook County, Minnesota. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 

Mr. CRAVAACK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for the release of the reversionary interest held 

by the United States in certain land conveyed by the 

United States in 1950 for the establishment of an airport 

in Cook County, Minnesota. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RELEASE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST AND 

4 USE CONDITIONS, COOK COUNTY AIRPORT, 

5 COOK COUNTY, MINNESOTA. 

6 (a) RELEASE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST RE7 QUIRED.—The Secretary of Agriculture, acting on behalf 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2947 IH

1 of the United States, shall release, without consider2 ation— 

3 (1) the conditions imposed on the use of the 

4 parcel of land originally conveyed by the Secretary 

5 pursuant to section 16 of the Federal Airport Act 

6 (Act of May 13, 1946, ch. 251, 60 Stat. 170) to the 

7 State of Minnesota by deed executed May 31, 1950, 

8 for the establishment of an airport in Cook County, 

9 Minnesota; and 

10 (2) the reversionary interest retained by the 

11 United States in connection with such conditions. 

12 (b) INSTRUMENT OF RELEASE.—The Secretary of 

13 Agriculture shall execute and file in the appropriate office 

14 a deed of release, amended deed, or other appropriate in15 strument reflecting the release of the reversionary interest 

16 and conditions under subsection (a). 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1 – 906 Certification








ENERGIZ RENEWABLE, INC.





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUNT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of Energiz Renewable, Inc. formerly C&G Dec Capital, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward T. Whelan, CEO and CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.








By: /s/ Edward T. Whelan


Edward T. Whelan


Chief Executive Officer


Chief Financial Officer





April 13, 2009





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Energiz Renewable, Inc., and will be retained by Energiz Renewable, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 136 

Expressing support for the designation of May 1, 2015, as ‘‘Silver Star 

Service Banner Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 16, 2015 

Mr. BLUNT (for himself and Mrs. MCCASKILL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

APRIL 30, 2015 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of May 1, 2015, 

as ‘‘Silver Star Service Banner Day’’. 

Whereas the Senate has always honored the sacrifices made 

by the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces; 

Whereas the Silver Star Service Banner has come to represent the members of the Armed Forces and veterans 

who were wounded or became ill in combat in the wars 

fought by the United States; 

Whereas the Silver Star Families of America was formed to 

help the people of the United States remember the sacrifices made by the wounded and ill members of the 

Armed Forces by designing and manufacturing Silver 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 136 ATS 

Star Service Banners and Silver Star Flags for that purpose; 

Whereas the sole mission of the Silver Star Families of 

America is to evoke memories of the sacrifices of members of the Armed Forces and veterans on behalf of the 

United States through the presence of a Silver Star Service Banner in a window or a Silver Star Flag flying; 

Whereas the sacrifices of members of the Armed Forces and 

veterans on behalf of the United States should never be 

forgotten; and 

Whereas May 1, 2015, is an appropriate date to designate as 

‘‘Silver Star Service Banner Day’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate supports the designation 

2 of May 1, 2015, as ‘‘Silver Star Service Banner Day’’ and 

3 calls upon the people of the United States to observe the 

4 day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1





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 Annual Report of Solar Thin Films, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Robert M. Rubin, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and Exchange
Act of 1934; and





(2) The information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and result of operations of the Company.





A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Solar Thin Films,
Inc. and will be retained by Solar Thin Films, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


/s/  Robert
      M. RubinRobert
      M. RubinChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)


April 23,
2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
TRANSCEND SERVICES, INC. FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<F1>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,387
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,645
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (704)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,560
<PP&E>                                           6,076
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,746)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,482
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,291
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          2
<COMMON>                                           220
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,346
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,482
<SALES>                                         47,281
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,281
<CGS>                                           45,305
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,351
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   855
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (2,456)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,456)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,052)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (2,052)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,988)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    $(1.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  $(1.14)
<FN>
<F1>Transcend Services, Inc. effected a 1-for-5 reverse stock split on January
14, 2000. Prior Financial Data Schedules have not been restated.
</FN>




</TABLE>