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

                                 UNITED STATES
                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                            Washington, D.C. 20549



                                   FORM 8-K



                                CURRENT REPORT



      Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934



         Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): July 31, 2003
                                                          ---------------




                    Registrant, State of         I.R.S. Employer
 Commission            Incorporation,            Identification
 File Number    Address and Telephone Number         Number
-------------  ------------------------------   ----------------

  1-7297        Nicor Inc.                          36-2855175
                (An Illinois Corporation)
                1844 Ferry Road
                Naperville, Illinois 60563-9600
                (630) 305-9500


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

<PAGE>

                                                                   Page 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Item 7.   Financial Statements and Exhibits

The following is filed as an exhibit to this report.


 Exhibit
 Number          Description
 -------         -----------

  99.1     Press release of Nicor Inc. issued July 31, 2003.


Item 12.   Results of Operations and Financial Condition

The information in the attached Nicor Inc. press release issued July 31, 2003 is
being provided under Item 12.



<PAGE>


                                                                   Page 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Signature

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.




                                    Nicor Inc.


Date    July 31, 2003               /s/ KATHLEEN L. HALLORAN
      -----------------             ---------------------------
                                    Kathleen L. Halloran
                                    Executive Vice President
                                    Finance and Administration

<PAGE>


                                                                  Page 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exhibit Index
-------------

 Exhibit
 Number                   Description of Document
 -------       ---------------------------------------------------
  99.1         Press release of Nicor Inc. issued July 31, 2003.
Appeal No. 79-70.

#### Donald Salmanson v. Morris Karklin *et al.*

*Melvin A. Chernick,*for plaintiff. *Smith ir Smith, Incorporated,*Z. *Hershel Smith,*for defendants.

The defendants appeared before us on November 7, 1979 in response to our order to show cause why their appeal should not be dismissed in light of our rulings in *Nass*v. *Garniss,*44 R.I. 162, 116 A. 341 (1922) and *Grayboyes*v. *Shatz,*74 R.I. 495, 62 A.2d 512 (1948).

The defendants having failed to show cause the appeal is hereby dismissed.
#### Rudolph Charles MAST, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 15011.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

Feb. 12, 1954.

James J. Courtney, Jr., Duluth, Minn., for appellant.

George E. MacKinnon, U. S. Atty., and Alex Dim, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Paul, Minn., for appellee.

*656PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court docketed and dismissed, on motion of appellee and consent of appellant, and stipulation of parties.
STEVEN BEASLEY

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 3585

_________ ____________________/

Opinion filed April 9, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County

. James B. Fensom , Judge.

Steven H. Beasley, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore , Assistant Attorney

General, Tall ahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS and WETHERELL, JJ., and SOUD, ADRIAN G., ASSOCIATE

JUDGE, CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 10.8


 


SUMMARY

2005 DISCRETIONARY EXECUTIVE BONUS PROGRAM


 


The
2005 Discretionary Executive Bonus Program is based on a percentage of each
executive’s annual salary, determined using the Objectives set forth below. The
actual thresholds for each Objective and the inclusion of any such Objectives
are determined annually by the Board of Directors and may vary from year to
year.  Certain Objectives have minimum
thresholds that must be attained before any bonus can be earned.   All percentages below are the maximum
possible bonus that can be earned in 2005 for reaching the highest threshold
for each Objective.  The program is not a
contract guarantying a bonus, and any bonus and the achievement level of each
Objective is in the sole discretion of the Board of Directors, or its
Compensation Committee.


 


OBJECTIVES FOR 2005


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  Maximum % of Salary

  	
   

  
	
  Financial
  Objectives

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Pre-Tax Net Profit

  	
   

  	
  20

  	
  %

  
	
  Return on Average Equity

  	
   

  	
  7.5

  	
  %

  
	
  Pre-Tax Net Margin Retention

  (Pre-Tax Net Profit/Total Revenue)

  	
   

  	
  7.5

  	
  %

  
	
  Revenue/Pre-Tax Net Profit Growth

  	
   

  	
  5.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Used Car Revenue/Gross Profit Growth

  	
   

  	
  2.5

  	
  %

  
	
  Service and Parts Revenue/Gross Profit Growth

  	
   

  	
  2.5

  	
  %

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Non-Financial/Operational

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Minimum Sales Requirement

  (at or above Zone average set by manufacturer)

  	
   

  	
  5.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Approved to Purchase Stores

  (satisfy specific manufacturer criteria to purchase stores)

  	
   

  	
  10.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Sales Satisfaction Scores

  (percentage of stores equaling or exceeding manufacturer’s criteria)

  	
   

  	
  5.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Service Satisfaction Scores

  (percentage of stores equaling or exceeding manufacturer’s criteria)

  	
   

  	
  5.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Implement Used Vehicle Stocking Plan

  	
   

  	
  2.5

  	
  %

  
	
  Implement Independent Used Vehicle Lots

  	
   

  	
  10.0

  	
  %

  
	
  Implement Lithia Store Management System

  (throughout entire Lithia dealership network)

  	
   

  	
  7.5

  	
  %

  
	
  Implement HR Development Programs

  	
   

  	
  10.0

  	
  %
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*

#### § 1468.8 Payments not subject to claims.

Any cost-share, contract, agreement, or easement payment or portion, thereof, due any person, legal entity, Indian Tribe, eligible entity, or other party under this part will be allowed without regard to any claim or lien in favor of any creditor, except agencies of the United States.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Candela Corporation on Form S-3 (File No. 33-46056) and on Form S-8 (File Nos.
33-18932, 33-29291, 33-35091, 33-37696, 33-37697, 33-37698, 33-55596, and
33-73040) of Candela Corporation of our report dated August 23, 1999 relating to
the financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.



/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



Boston, Massachusetts
September 27, 2001
EXHIBIT 21

                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
NAME                                             JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION         PERCENTAGE OWNERSHIP
<S>                                              <C>                                   <C>
Billion Luck Company Ltd.                        British Virgin Islands                100% (held by Registrant)

Sunwide Capital Limited                          British Virgin Islands                100%(held by Billion Luck)

Silver Moon Technologies Limited                 British Virgin Islands                80% (held by Registrant)

Zhongwei Medi-China.com Limited                  Hong Kong Special Administrative      100% (held by Silver Moon)
                                                 Region

Hainan Cihui Industrial Company Ltd.             People's Republic of China            100% (5% held by
                                                                                       Registrant and 95% held
                                                                                       by Billion Luck)

First Goods And Materials Supply                 People's Republic of China            100% (held by HARC)
   and Sales Corporation                                                               (inactive)

Second Goods And Materials Supply                People's Republic of China            100% (held by HARC)
   and Sales Corporation                                                               (inactive)

Hainan Zhongwei Trading Company Ltd.             People's Republic of China            100% (95% held by
                                                                                       HARC and 5% held by
                                                                                       Billion Luck) (inactive)

Shenzhen Xubu Investment Co. Ltd.                People's Republic of China            100% (held by HARC)
                                                                                       (disposed of subsequent to fiscal
                                                                                       year end)

Isense Limited                                   Hong Kong Special Administrative      100% (held by Registrant)
                                                 Region
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2099 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2099

 To provide for an accounting of total United States contributions to 
                          the United Nations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 22, 2013

Mr. Brooks of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                  to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for an accounting of total United States contributions to 
                          the United Nations.

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

SECTION 1. REPORT ON UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE UNITED NATIONS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the Director of the 
Office of Management and Budget shall submit to Congress a report on 
all assessed and voluntary contributions, including in-kind, of the 
United States Government to the United Nations and its affiliated 
agencies and related bodies during the previous fiscal year.
    (b) Content.--The report required under subsection (a) shall 
include the following elements:
            (1) The total amount of all assessed and voluntary 
        contributions, including in-kind, of the United States 
        Government to the United Nations and its affiliated agencies 
        and related bodies during the previous fiscal year.
            (2) The approximate percentage of United States Government 
        contributions to each United Nations affiliated agency or body 
        in such fiscal year when compared with all contributions to 
        each such agency or body from any source in such fiscal year.
            (3) For each such United States Government contribution--
                    (A) the amount of each such contribution;
                    (B) a description of each such contribution 
                (including whether assessed or voluntary);
                    (C) the department or agency of the United States 
                Government responsible for each such contribution;
                    (D) the purpose of each such contribution; and
                    (E) the United Nations or its affiliated agency or 
                related body receiving the contribution.
    (c) Scope of Initial Report.--The first report required under 
subsection (a) shall include the information required under this 
section for the previous three fiscal years.
    (d) Public Availability of Information.--Not later than 14 days 
after submitting a report required under subsection (a), the Director 
of the Office of Management and Budget shall post a public version of 
the report on a text-based, searchable, and publicly available Internet 
Web site.
                                 <all>
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 1951

#### Editorial Notes:

1. Some of the exhibits referenced in this part 1951 are not published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Exhibits are available in any Rural Development office.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1951 appear at 80 FR 9890-9894, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1951.718-1951.750 [Reserved]
#### Sodusky *vs.*McGee.

Trespass. Case 95-

Error to the Jessamine Circuit; Kelley, Judge.

*Evidence. Confession.*

April 26.

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the opinion of the Court.

John McGee sued John Johnson, James Sodusky, and several others, for an assault and battery. On the trial, as there was no proof that all the persons jointly sued had actually assaulted or beaten the defendant in error, the court permitted *267j^IcG-ee to prove by one Singleton, that he (the witness) “after the tight, heard James Sodusky and John Johnson talking — Sodusky said he came there to vvnip the d-d rascal — and Johnson said *it was a plot to do so.”*

The confesdefendant 6m an action’of assault and sssr* gainst a co“efent ant‘

The plaintiff in error then moved the following instruction — “that the confession or statement of one of the defendants, Johnson, is not evidence against *any*of his co-defendants — to prove a *conspiracy between them”*— But the motion was overruled, and we think, improperly.

If a combination had been proved, an acknowledgment, by any one of the confederates, of auy *fact*concerning the trespass, would have been admissible evidence against all of his associates. But. a declaration or confession by One, is not competent, to prove that others had been combined with him. The 'admission of such testimony, for such a. purpose, would be inconsistent with the first principles of proof in courts of justice. The confession of one defendant cannot prove that a co-defendant had aided or abetted him in the perpetration of an imputed wrong. *Johnson did not even state who had made*-i".” . _

. _ The declaration made by Johnson, was legitimate evitlence against himself and Jámes Sodusky with whom lie was conversing, and who did not deny the “píoí;” and therefore, if the instruction, as proposed, could be construed to import only that Johnson's statement was not legal evidence against *any one*of tue defendants, there would-have been no error in refusing to give it.

But it means more: The *expressions*— (“is *not evidence*agaiust any of his co-defendants -to prove a confederacy between *them”)*must be understood to mean that Jonnson s statement was not admissible to prove a confederacy by *the*defendants, that is, ail the defendants in tne action. And, consequently, the circuit court erred in not giving the instruction.

(See *Metcalfe*vs. Conner, *Sel. ca.*497-8.)

All the other points embraced in the assignment, of errors, have been hitherto virtually settled between the present plaintiffs in error, and other par*268ties, and will not, therefore, be now again noticed. The error which has been noticed is the only one perceived in this record, and was not presented in any one of the former cases to which allusion has been made.

*Chinn*and Sanders, for plaintiff; Hewitt, for defendant.

W herefore, for the error of the circuit court in-refusing to give the instruction proposed as to Johnson’s statement, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Yijun Wang, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Jpak Group, Inc.;

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

 

5. The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b) any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date: May 23, 2008
Dated: June 17, 2013 

### · - · ',- · Reeve AirAlaska, LLC 2__?47Mistybrook Circle
Response to Re-solicitation ·'· VJ/nchorage, Alaska 99502 (907) 250-4766 mreeve@reevecorp.com

Reeve AirAlaska, LLC Proposal to Provide Essential Air Service at Tatitlek, Alaska DOCKET DOT-OST-2013-0030

For the rate period ofthis docket beginning in 2013 and lasting 2 years from the date ofcommencement, Reeve AirAlaska, LLC proposes to provide passenger and freight service between Tatitlek (PAKA) and Anchorage International Airport (PANG) using an IFR equipped Piper Navajo PA-31 twin engine aircraftwith up to 7 passenger seats. For consideration by the Department ofTransportation and the Village ofTatitlek, Reeve Air Alaska offers two (2) options ofservice for review. Option 1 Year-round, weekly service, ofa single non-stop flight for an annual subsidy of $46,540 ($895 perflight). Option 2 Year-round, weekly service, with two non-stop flights for an annual subsidy of $93,080 ($895 perflight) Forfurther consideration: • Reeve's flights to Tatitlek will be non-stop flights to and from Anchorage. • Reserved one-way seatfare for self-paying village residents is $110.00. • Freight and Excess Baggage rate is $.60 per pound. • Reeve AirAlaska will seek to provide scheduled mail delivery to Tatitlek from the USPS. Proposed Schedule on day offlight: • DepartAnchorage at 1:00pm- Arrive at Tatitlek at 2:00pm • Depart Tatitlek at 2:15 pm- Arrive at Anchorage at 3:15 pm Sincerely,



### 1
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION**     I,Thomas Deery, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Dirt Motor Sports, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresas of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the“Evaluation Date”); andc) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls whichcould adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any materialweaknesses in internal controls; andb) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly reportwhether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors thatcould significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recentevaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.     Date:November 2, 2005 /s/ Thomas Deery     Thomas Deery,    Chief Executive Officer and President
2006-0862.

#### State ex rel. Richard v. Anderson.

Lorain App. No. 06CA008887. On motion for emergency relief and immediate consideration and second motion for emergency relief and immediate consideration. Motions denied.