alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exhibit101.htm


Exhibit 10.1






 



Director Compensation Policy


 


The following table sets forth the compensation payable to nonemployee directors of Lexmark International, Inc.:


 



	
Annual Retainer Fee

	
$50,000


	
Presiding Director Annual Retainer Fee

	
$15,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Finance and Audit Committee

	
$20,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Compensation and Pension Committee

	
$12,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Other Committees

	
$10,000


	
Daily Board Meeting Attendance Fee

	
$2,500


	
Committee Meeting Attendance Fees (if held other than on a Board Meeting date)


	
Finance and Audit Committee

	
$2,500


	
Other Committees

	
$2,000


	
Telephonic Meeting Attendance Fee

	
$750


	
Initial Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)

	
$150,000


	
Annual Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)

	
$125,000







Terms of Equity Awards


 


Initial Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)


 



	
·  

	
Grant Date: Date of Election to the Board







 



	
·  

	
Number of RSUs: Face value of award divided by the closing price of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the Grant Date, rounded up to the nearest whole share







 



	
·  

	
Vesting: 100% vested on the sixth anniversary of the Grant Date







 



	
·  

	
Settlement: On termination of status as a Board member







 


Annual Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)


 



	
·  

	
Grant Date: Annual Meeting of Stockholders







 



	
·  

	
Number of RSUs: Face value of award divided by the closing price of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the Grant Date, rounded up to nearest whole share







 



	
·  

	
Vesting: 100% vested on the date immediately preceding the next Annual Meeting of Stockholders







 



	
·  

	
Settlement: 34% on the second anniversary of the date of grant and 33% on each of the third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant







 


Deferred Stock Units: Pursuant to the terms of the Lexmark International, Inc. 2005 Nonemployee Director Stock Plan, each nonemployee director may defer his or her retainer and/or meeting fees into Deferred Stock Units based on the fair market value of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the date of deferral. The Deferred Stock Units are eligible for settlement initially on June 30th in the fifth year following the date of grant.
Exhibit
32.1




CEO
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 Emclaire Financial Corp. (the
“Corporation”) 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, William C. Marsh, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify,
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 result of operations of the
      Corporation.




/s/William C. MarshWilliam
      C. MarshChief
      Executive OfficerMarch
      22, 2010
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Office of Government Ethics]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICSLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCDirectorStephen D. PottsEXPASIII..........08/13/2000Washington, DCExecutive SecretaryJanet B. PapinchakGSSC12..................Washington, DCGeneral CounselF G. DavisESCA............................
```
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1


                  CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with amendment no. 1 to the quarterly report on Form
10-QSB of netGuru, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2002 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, 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, as amended; and

         2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: December 2, 2002                       By:  /s/ Amrit K. Das
                                                       -----------------
                                                       Amrit K. Das
                                                       Chief Executive Officer


         In connection with amendment no. 1 to the quarterly report on Form
10-QSB of netGuru, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2002 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, 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, as amended; and

         2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: December 2, 2002                       By:/s/ Bruce K. Nelson
                                                     ---------------
                                                     Bruce K. Nelson
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1


                             Transbotics Corporation

                   Certification of Periodic Financial Report
                        Pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of the Transbotics
Corporation (the "Company") certify that the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the
Company for the fiscal period ending November 30, 2004 fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in that Form 10-KSB fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.


Dated: February 18, 2005

                                        /s/Claude Imbleau
                                        Claude Imbleau
                                        President and CEO
                                        (principal executive officer and
                                        principal accounting officer)

     ** This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00268-CV

IN RE FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE CO. 

Original Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice 

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice 

Delivered and Filed: May 8, 2013

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On April 29, 2013, Relator Fidelity National Title Insurance Co. filed a petition for writ 

of mandamus, complaining of the trial court’s April 29, 2013 Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion 

to Compel. For the following reasons, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied without 

prejudice.

First, mandamus relief is only available if the relator establishes both the trial court 

abused its discretion and relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Prudential Ins. 

Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 125 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relator fails to address why it 

lacks an adequate remedy by appeal.

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2012-CI-05517, styled Fidelity National Title Insurance Co. v. Andrew M. 

Parker, pending in the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Cathy Stryker presiding. 

However, the order complained of was signed by the Honorable Peter Sakai, presiding judge of the 225th Judicial 

District Court, Bexar County, Texas. 
04-13-00268-CV

- 2 -

In addition, Relator’s petition fails to comply with numerous requirements outlined in 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(g) (“[e]very statement of fact in 

the petition must be supported by citation to competent evidence included in the appendix or 

record”); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j) (“[t]he person filing the petition must certify that he or she has 

reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by 

competent evidence included in the appendix or record”); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2) (relator must 

file with the petition “a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any

underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no 

testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained”).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45872-45873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20987]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Complementary & Integrative Health; Notice of 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the ZAT1 AJT (04).
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections

[[Page 45873]]

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

    Name of Committee: National Center for Complementary and 
Integrative Health Special Emphasis Panel; NIH Health Care Systems 
Research Collaboratory Review.
    Date: October 31, 2017.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 
Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Ashlee Tipton, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Division of Extramural Activities, National Center for Complementary 
and Integrative Health, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 401, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-3849, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#28495b40444d4d065c41585c474668464140064f475e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fb9a8893979e9ed58f928b8f9495bb959293d59c948d">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, 
Research and Training in Complementary and Integrative Health, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 26, 2017.
Michelle Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-20987 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# 038-/JT ELECTRONIC RECORD COA# 07-13-00422-CR OFFENSE: 22.011 

### STYLE: Gabriel Lunav.The State of Texas COUNTY: Lubbock COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 137th District Court DATE: 12/10/2014 Publish: NO TCCASE #: 2011-432,524

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS 

### STYLE: Gabriel Lunav. The State of Texas CCA#: _ 

# k??£LLAAJT^ Petition CCADisposition: FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: DATE: 

# .fi\afo*Cc/ JUDGE: 

# 038-IS DATE: i&ny «•<•»• UJUFo SIGNED: PC:_ 

# JUDGE: /°<Z *JOnn J Z.O/S" PUBLISH: DNP: REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: MOTION FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Henry JONES, Appellant.

No. 08-1692.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2008.

Filed: April 25, 2008.

Jane Duke, Michael D. Johnson, Asst. U.S. Asst., Little Rock, AR, argued, for Appellee.

*882Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Henry Jones appeals the district court’s1 denial of his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG), which reduced the base offense levels in USSG § 2Dl.l(c) based on the quantity of cocaine base (crack).

The top of Mr. Jones’s originally calculated guidelines range was less than the statutory mandatory minimum sentence for the quantity of crack involved in his conviction, so that his final originally calculated guidelines range was the statutorily required minimum sentence of 120 months. *See*USSG § 5G1.1(b); 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(b). In considering a reduction to a defendant’s term of imprisonment under § 3582(c)(2), the district court must determine the guidelines range as if the relevant amendment had been in place at the time of the original sentencing, and it may consider only the retroactive amendment in determining the amended guidelines range. *See United States v. Hasan,*245 F.3d 682, 684-85 (8th Cir.) (en banc), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 905, 122 S.Ct. 238, 151 L.Ed.2d 172 (2001); USSG § 1B1.10(b)(1) (Suppl. Mar. 3, 2008). In Mr. Jones’s case, both his original guidelines range and any guidelines range calculated under the new amendments are the same — the statutory minimum sentence of 120 months. The district court properly concluded that Jones’s guidelines range was unaffected by the recent amendments to the crack quantity guidelines because of the statutory mandatory minimum, USSG § 5Gl.l(b), and therefore Mr. Jones was not entitled to a reduction of his sentence, see § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) (district court may not reduce the defendant’s sentence below the minimum of the amended guidelines range); *id.,*comment, (n. l(A)(ii)) (reduction not authorized if the retroactive amendment does not lower the defendant’s applicable guidelines range because of a statutory provision, *e.g.,*a statutory mandatory minimum sentence).

The district court’s judgment denying Mr. Jones any relief pursuant to the new amendments is summarily affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

1

. The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3306 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3306

 To repeal the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 2, 2011

  Mr. Flores introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To repeal the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program.

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

SECTION 1. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLE MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM.

    (a) Repeal.--Section 136(d) of the Energy Independence and Security 
Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17103(d)) is repealed.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the date of 
its enactment.
                                 <all>
```
CH

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0242

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

DYLAN MIKKEL OHL,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to

and including August 14, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve the State’s

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 11 2022

07/11/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0242
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: V.M.C., A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.P., MOTHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 213 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE INTEREST OF: V.M.C. , A MINOR

PETITION OF: A.P., MOTHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 214 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7th day of July, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE JAMES MADISON MEMORIAL FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATIONLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCPresidentPaul A. YostADXS............................Washington, DCDirector of ProgramsLewis F. LarsenADXS............................Washington, DCDirector of Administration and FinanceGary S. FoyADXS............................Washington, DCAcademic AssistantJoan H. BybeeADXS............................Washington, DCSpecial Assistant/Office ManagerNorma J. ClaytorADXS............................
```
FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 

INFORMATION SHEET BY COURT REPORTERS 

You are expected to file the reporter’s record by the original due date. See Tex. R. App. P.35. If 

a reporter determines that the due date may not be met, please advise the Clerk of the Court of 

Appeals immediately in writing, stating the reason and the due date by which the record will be 

filed. Generally speaking, for good cause shown, the Court will grant no more than two 

extensions from the original record due date, each extension not to exceed 30 days in regular 

appeals and 10 days in accelerated appeals for a total period not to exceed 60 days in regular 

appeals and 20 days in accelerated appeals.

 

Appellate Case Number: Trial Court Case Number: 

(1) Is there a Reporter's Record? Y N

(2) Are you the only court reporter involved in this appeal? Y N

If not, please provide the names and addresses of all other court

reporters below.

(3) Has the appellant requested that the reporter’s record be prepared or 

has the trial court ordered that the record be prepared?

 Y N

(4) Please select from the following options:

 A. The appellant has paid for the record.

 B. The appellant has made arrangements to pay for the record

 C. The appellant is appealing as indigent.

 D. The appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the

 record and is not appealing as indigent.

(5) Extension (fill out if extension is required for any reason other than payment)

I was unable to file the record in this appeal by ________. I expect the record 

in this appeal to be approximately _______ pages. The record covers 

_______days of testimony. I believe that I can file the record by _________. I 

ask that the court grant an extension until that time for filing the record.

Additional Comments: ___________________________________________

Court Reporter's Signature, Full Address, Email Address and Telephone Number: 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 2/20/2015 12:48:23 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3009 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3009

To amend the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 
to require that any new national wildlife refuge may not be established 
               except as expressly authorized by statute.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 2011

 Mr. Fleming introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 
to require that any new national wildlife refuge may not be established 
               except as expressly authorized by statute.

    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 ``National Wildlife Refuge Review Act 
of 2011''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES.

    (a) In General.--Section 4(a) of the National Wildlife Refuge 
System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
    ``(6) The Secretary may not establish any national wildlife refuge 
except as expressly authorized by a law enacted after September 30, 
2011.''.
    (b) Existing Refuges Not Affected.--The amendment made by 
subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to any national wildlife 
refuge established on or before September 30, 2011.
                                 <all>
```