alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-Q/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
 þ
    
    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the quarterly period ended July 31, 2005
 OR
 o
    
    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 Commission file number: 1-31642
 INTERNATIONAL ABSORBENTS INC.
  Province of British Columbia, Canada(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
    
    None(IRS Employer Identification Number)
 
 (Address of principal executive offices)
  (Issuers telephone number, including area code)
  Yes     þ
    
    No     o
  Yes     o
    
    No     þ
  Yes     o
    
    No     þ
  Title of Class
    
    No. of Shares as of August 23, 2005Common Shares, no par value
    
    6,260,568




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Explanatory NoteITEM 6. EXHIBITSSIGNATURESEX-31.1EX-31.2EX-32.1EX-32.2    Table of Contents  
 International Absorbents, Inc.
Form 10-Q/A
(Amendment No. 1)
Explanatory Note
   
 ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS
 ExhibitNumber
    
    Exhibit Description3.1
    
    
    Altered Memorandum of Company (Amended) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the
Companys Form 10-KSB filed on April 3, 2003).3.2
    
    
    Articles of the Company (incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Companys
registration statement filed on February 24, 1992, as amended (No. 33-45020)).31.1
    
    
    Certification of Gordon Ellis, President and Chief Executive Officer of International
Absorbents Inc., pursuant to Rule 13a‐14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.31.2
    
    
    Certification of David Thompson, Chief Financial Officer of International Absorbents Inc.,
pursuant to Rule 13a‐14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.32.1*
    
    
    Certification of Gordon Ellis, President and Chief Executive Officer of International
Absorbents Inc., pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.32.2*
    
    
    Certification of David Thompson, Chief Financial Officer of International Absorbents Inc.,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
 
 *
    
    Replaces previously filed exhibit. 2




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  INTERNATIONAL ABSORBENTS INC.
(Registrant)Date: September 15, 2005
    /s/ GORDON L. ELLISGordon L. EllisPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Date: September 15, 2005
    /s/ DAVID H. THOMPSONDavid H. ThompsonSecretary and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) 3
# L_2020015DE.01000801.xml

| 20.1.2020 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 15/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2020

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 15/8

---

Berichtigung der Richtlinie (EU) 2019/944 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 5. Juni 2019 mit gemeinsamen Vorschriften für den Elektrizitätsbinnenmarkt und zur Änderung der Richtlinie 2012/27/EU

(Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 158 vom 14. Juni 2019)

Seite 191, Artikel 73 Satz 3:

Anstatt:

„Artikel 70 Nummern 1 bis 4, Nummer 5 Buchstabe b und Nummer 6 gelten ab dem 1. Januar 2021.“

muss es heißen:

„Artikel 70 Nummern 1 bis 3, Nummer 5 Buchstabe b und Nummer 6 gelten ab dem 1. Januar 2021.“

---
### Geology and underground waters of southern Minnesota

By: C.W. HallO. E. MeinzerMyron Leslie Fuller

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp256

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                              AIRWAYS CORPORATION

         COMPUTATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES AND PER SHARE EARNINGS

                      (In thousands except per share data)
                                  (Unaudited)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         FOR THE YEARS ENDED MARCH 31, 
                                                                   ---------------------------------------
                                                                      1997            1996           1995
                                                                   ---------        --------       -------
 <S>                                                                 <C>              <C>              <C>
 Weighted average number of common shares outstanding                  9,029           5,041               -
 Pro-forma impact of:
   shares issued upon incorporation in 1995                                -           3,899              22
   shares issued in conjunction with spin-off in 1995                      -               -           8,905
 Net effect of assumed exercise of stock options based on
   treasury stock method using average market price                        -             290               -   
                                                                 ------------------------------------------- 
 Weighted average shares outstanding
   (pro-forma in 1996 and 1995)                                        9,029           9,230           8,927         
                                                                 ===========================================
 Net (loss) income                                               $    (6,991)     $    1,187     $    (3,496)
                                                                 ===========================================
 Net (loss) income per common share (pro-forma in
   1996 and 1995)                                                $      (.77)     $      .13     $      (.39)
                                                                 ===========================================    
                                                                 
</TABLE>
§ 520.1372 Methimazole. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each tablet contains 2.5 or 5 milligrams (mg) methimazole.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 043264 in § 510.600 of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in cats* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* The starting dose is 2.5 mg every 12 hours. Following 3 weeks of treatment, the dose should be titrated to effect based on individual serum total T4 levels and clinical response.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of hyperthyroidism.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[74 FR 27707, June 11, 2009]
###### Editorial Note on [Part 112](/current/title-21/part-112?toc=1)

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at [81 FR 49896](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/81-FR-49896), July 29, 2016.

#### § 112.56 What application requirements and minimum application intervals apply to biological soil amendments of animal origin?

(a) You must apply the biological soil amendments of animal origin specified in the first column of the table in this [paragraph (a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.56#p-112.56(a)) in accordance with the application requirements specified in the second column of the table in this [paragraph (a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.56#p-112.56(a)) and the minimum application intervals specified in the third column of the table in this [paragraph (a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.56#p-112.56(a)).

| If the biological soil amendment of animal origin is— | Then the biological soil amendment of animal origin must be applied— | And then the minimum application interval is— |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (1)(i) Untreated | In a manner that does not contact covered produce during application and minimizes the potential for contact with covered produce after application | [Reserved]. |
| (ii) Untreated | In a manner that does not contact covered produce during or after application | 0 days. |
| (2) Treated by a scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, or biological process, or combination of scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, and/or biological processes, in accordance with the requirements of [§ 112.54(b)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.54#p-112.54(b)) to meet the microbial standard in [§ 112.55(b)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.55#p-112.55(b)) | In a manner that minimizes the potential for contact with covered produce during and after application | 0 days. |
| (3) Treated by a scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, or biological process, or combination of scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, or biological processes, in accordance with the requirements of [§ 112.54(a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.54#p-112.54(a)) to meet the microbial standard in [§ 112.55(a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-21/section-112.55#p-112.55(a)) | In any manner (*i.e.*, no restrictions) | 0 days. |

(b) [Reserved]
<PAGE>   1

Exhibit 21.1

                                 PROSOURCE, INC.
                            Significant Subsidiaries

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
        Legal Name                  State of Incorporation               Trade Name
        ----------                  ----------------------               ----------
<S>                                         <C>              <C>    
ProSource Services Corporation              Delaware         ProSource Distribution Services
BroMar Services, Inc.                       Delaware         n/a
ProSource Receivables Corporation           Delaware         n/a
PSD Transportation Services, Inc.           Nevada           n/a
ProSource Investments, Inc.                 Delaware         n/a
</TABLE>


                                       67
§ 520.538 Deracoxib. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each tablet contains 12, 25, 50, 75, or 100 milligrams (mg) deracoxib.
( b ) *Sponsors.* See Nos. 013744, 058198, and 086101 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in dogs* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer orally as needed, as a single daily dose based on body weight: ( i ) 1 to 2 mg/kilogram (kg) (0.45 to 0.91 mg/pound (lb)), for use as in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section.
( ii ) 1 to 2 mg/kg (0.45 to 0.91 mg/lb) for 3 days, for use as in paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section.
( iii ) 3 to 4 mg/kg (1.4 to 1.8 mg/lb) for up to 7 days, for use as in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* ( i ) For the control of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis.
( ii ) For the control of postoperative pain and inflammation associated with dental surgery.
( iii ) For the control of postoperative pain and inflammation associated with orthopedic surgery.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[67 FR 68760, Nov. 13, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 18882, Apr. 17, 2003; 72 FR 37437, July 10, 2007; 73 FR 33692, June 13, 2008; 77 FR 3928, Jan. 26, 2012; 84 FR 39183, Aug. 9, 2019; 86 FR 61684, Nov. 8, 2021]
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.35
[UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA LETTERHEAD]

                                                          Date
                                                    January 26, 1998

John Hohener, CFO
SMARTFLEX SYSTEMS INCORPORATED
14312 Franklin Avenue
Tustin, CA 92781-2085

          NOTICE OF WAIVER
          Re: Loan Agreement
          Dated: September 26, 1997

Dear Mr. Hohener:

     You have requested the following waiver(s) in reference to the Loan
Agreement ("Agreement") between Union Bank of California, N.A. ("Bank") and
Smartflex Systems Incorporated ("Borrower") referred to above.

     Bank hereby waives Borrower's breach of Section 4.8 Profit From Operations
and Section 4.9 Cash Flow of the Agreement occurring prior to January 1, 1998.
Any further breach of these sections is not waived.

     Except as waived hereby, the Agreement, as the same may have previously
been waived, shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect. This letter
shall not be a waiver of any existing default or breach of a covenant unless
specified herein.

     If you agree with the foregoing, please sign the enclosed acknowledgment
copy and return it on or before February 15, 1998.

                                        UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, N.A.

                                        By     [SIG]
                                          -------------------------------------
                                        Title  Vice President
                                             -----------------------------------

                                        By     [SIG]
                                          -------------------------------------
                                        Title  Vice President
                                             -----------------------------------

SMARTFLEX SYSTEMS INCORPORATED hereby
agree to and acknowledge this waiver
this 30th day of January, 1998.

By     [SIG]
  --------------------------------------
Title  VP, CFO
     -----------------------------------

By    
  --------------------------------------
Title 
     -----------------------------------

                                      -1-
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  quarterly  report of Avitar,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on
Form10-QSB for the period ending  December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter P. Phildius,
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, to
my knowledge, that:

     (1) The Report  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)
or15(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: February 14, 2006

                                             /s/ Peter P. Phildius
                                             ---------------------
                                             Peter P. Phildius Chief
                                             Executive Officer
#### Board of Commissioners of Monroe County et al. *v.*The State, ex rel. Underwood.

[No. 19,175.

Filed May 14, 1901.]

From the Monroe Circuit Court.

*Reversed.*

*J. E. Henley*and *J. B. Wilson,*for appellants.

*R. W. Miers*and *E. Corr,*for appellees.

Jordan, J.

Appeal from a judgment awarding the relatrix a writ of mandamus compelling appellants to issue a warrant in her favor upon the treasurer of Monroe county for $77, assessed and due to her for damages to her land by reason of the construction of a free turnpike. The parties in this case are the same as those in the appeal of *Board, etc.,*v. *State, ex rel. Underwood, ante, 550,*and the same facts and questions are involved as were in that case, and the record and certificate of the clerk is in the same condition, and upon the authority of that decision the judgment below in this case is reversed, and the cause remanded to the lower court, with instructions to vacate its judgment and grant"appellants a new trial.
§ 182.8252 Choline chloride. ( a ) *Product.* Choline chloride.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing practice.
glt-ex101_31.htm



EXHIBIT 10.1

P. H. Glatfelter Company 

Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation
(effective May 4, 2017) 

 

 


				
	
Feature
	
Frequency
	
 
	
Amount

	
Board Retainer
	
Annually
	
 
	
$70,000

	
Equity
	
Annually
	
 
	
115,000(1)

	
Meeting fees
	
 
	
 
	
‐ (2)

	
Committee Chairperson retainer
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
Audit Committee
	
Annually
	
 
	
20,000

	
Compensation Committee
	
Annually
	
 
	
15,000

	
Nominating & Corporate Governance Committee
	
Annually
	
 
	
10,000

	
Finance Committee
	
Annually
	
 
	
10,000

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 





	
 
	
(1)
	
Value of Restricted stock units with a one-year cliff vesting.  The awards accrue dividends until the award vests.





	
 
	
(2)
	
Each director is entitled to $1,500 per meeting of the Board of Directors attended in excess of eight (8) meetings in a calendar year.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          83,263
<SECURITIES>                                    20,234
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,649,590
<ALLOWANCES>                                   104,497
<INVENTORY>                                  2,756,627
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,500,553
<PP&E>                                       9,231,634
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,441,207
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,399,998
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,339,559
<BONDS>                                        953,850
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,209,495
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,877,711
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,399,998
<SALES>                                     21,392,963
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,479,807
<CGS>                                       19,380,883
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,577,264
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,688
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                46,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,485
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                461,843
<INCOME-TAX>                                   191,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            270,843
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   270,843
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
        

</TABLE>
# FILED
October 9, 1998 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk 

### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENN ESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

MATHIVATHANI MOHAN, ) ) Plaintiff/Appellee, ) Appeal No. ) 01-A-01-9708-CV-00415 ) VS. ) Davidson Circuit ) No. 96D-373 ) RATHNASABAPATHY MOHAN, ) ) Defendant/Appellant. )



### DISSENTING OPINION
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because I do not think the trial judge abused her discretion in deny ing theappellant’s motion for a new trial. The appellant’s motion does not set out what proof he would offer at a new trial and how thatmight change the result below. Therefore, I think the trial judge justifiably overruled the motion.

_________________________________ BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-20734

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KENNETH AYERS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-82-1

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

April 11, 2002

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

 Kenneth Ayers appeals his guilty-plea conviction for 

possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and § 841(b)(1)(C). He argues

that under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), 21 U.S.C.

§ 841 is facially unconstitutional; however, he concedes that

this court rejected an Apprendi-based challenge to the

constitutionality of § 841 in United States v. Slaughter, 238

F.3d 580, 581-82 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 2015

(2001). He asserts that he is raising the issue to preserve it
No. 01-20734

-2-

for en banc or Supreme Court review. He did not raise the issue

in the district court. 

 In Slaughter, 238 F.3d at 582, we held that there is

"nothing in the Supreme Court decision in Apprendi which would

permit [this court] to conclude that 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) and (b)

... are unconstitutional on their face." A panel of this court

cannot overrule a prior panel’s decision in the absence of an

intervening contrary or superseding decision by this court

sitting en banc or by the United States Supreme Court. Burge v.

Parish of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 466 (5th Cir. 1999). 

Moreover, the Ninth Circuit has reversed its decision in United

States v. Buckland, 259 F.3d 1157, 1160-68 (9th Cir. 2001), rev’d

en banc, 277 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2002), the only circuit-level

decision that supported Ayers’s argument. 

AFFIRMED.