Nootka appeared to have no weak points to exploit.

1. Type of subordinate clause / structure

a. to have no weak points to exploit > non-finite clause (infinitive clause),
complement of a raising verb.
b. to exploit > non-finite clause (relative, non-finite clause, approx. = no weak
points which one could exploit).

2. Comment on the type of transformation present, if any.

a. Nootka moves from Spec,IP in the subordinate clause to Spec,IP in the main
clause. It's an example of the DP movement known as raising. Nootka gets its
case and θ-role from the verb have, but the EPP requires the main clause to
have a subject. The finite verb assigns one argument only
(theme, to the subordinate clause), lacking therefore an agent. By means of
this movement, the Extended Projection Principle (clauses must contain a DP
in subject position) is fulfilled.
b. The Operator in the relative clause moves from the position where it is
assigned the θ-role of theme (in the complement position of exploit) to the
Spec,CP position within that clause. This is an example of Wh-movement,
triggered by the [-Q, +WH] feature of C in relative clauses. Since the infinitive
has no overt subject, PRO will fulfill that function (it's arbitrary PRO, since it's
the equivalent of anybody or one).
D-structure
S-structure
To simplify a little, I have not shown the affix –ed lowering to the V head.