alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,113
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  356,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   348,916
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,105
<PP&E>                                         191,132
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 768,932
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          586,835
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,603,734
<OTHER-SE>                                 (6,421,637)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   768,932
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,504
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,698
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                15,002
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,740
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (112,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (112,936)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
Amendment to Employment Agreement



 Exhibit 10.49 
 VICAL INCORPORATED 
 10390 Pacific Center Court 
 San Diego, CA 92121-4340 
 May 19,
2006 
 Dr. David Kaslow 
 Vical Incorporated 
 10390 Pacific Center Court 
 San Diego, CA 92121-4340 
  

	Re:	Amendment to Agreement Regarding Employment Terms 

 Dear David:

 This Amendment (the “Amendment”) to your Letter Agreement with Vical Incorporated (the “Company”) dated
September 13, 2001, as amended by the Letter Agreement dated October 4, 2001 and the Letter Agreement dated April 15, 2005 (collectively, the “Agreement”) amends the terms and conditions of the Agreement to the
extent provided herein. Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
 Paragraph 8(c) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 
 “(c) Salary
Continuation”. Subject to subsection (d) below, the Company will continue to pay your Base Compensation (at the annual rate then in effect) for up to twelve months following the termination of your employment if, prior to the
expiration of your rights to salary continuation as provided below: 
  

	 	(i)	the Company terminates your employment without your consent for any reason other than Cause or Disability; or 

  

	 	(ii)	you voluntarily resign your employment for Good Reason. 

 The payments under this subsection (c) will cease in the event of your death. In order to receive your salary continuation, you will be required to sign a release in a form acceptable to the Company, of any and all claims that you may
have against the Company. The salary continuation rights described in this paragraph 8(c) shall expire on October 8, 2006; provided, however, that such rights shall automatically renew for successive 1 year periods unless the Company
provides written notice to you at least 90 days prior to the next scheduled expiration date that such rights will not be renewed.” 
 This Amendment may
be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California, without regard to conflicts of law principles. 







 Please sign this Amendment and return it to the Company at your earliest convenience. 
  

			
	Sincerely,
	
	VICAL INCORPORATED
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Vijay B. Samant

		 	 Vijay B. Samant

		 	 President and Chief Executive Officer

	
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED:
	
	 /s/ David C. Kaslow

	 David C. Kaslow
SERVED: APRIL 19, 2011 

•::-:'ARTMENTnF 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NSPOfiTATIOM 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS . ^ y'S OPERATlOK'o 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Ifl .'.PH 20 A 9 U 

IN THE MATTER OF 

M & R HELICOPTER 

FAA DOCKET NO. CPlOSOOOll 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2010-12] 1 

ORDER OF CfflEF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

CORRECTING TRANSCRIPT 

The following corrections are hereby made in the transcript of the Prehearing 

Telephone Conference held March 25, 2011: 

PAGE LINE READS SHOULD READ 

on 

produce 

by 

being 

defense 

complaint 

our 

alleges 

ma* am 

concluding 

oath. 

3 

6 

7 

13 

15 

19 

19 

21 

23 

29 

29 

7 

20 

5 

14 

6 

2 

5 

18 

17 

2 

10 

in 

produced 

with 

be 

dissent 

complainant 

your 

he alleges 

madam 

including 

oath 
30 

32 

33 

34 

39 

39 

39 

40 

42 

47 

49 

49 

53 

57 

61 

61 

68 

70 

71 

71 

72 

74 

76 

18 

16 

3 

20 

5 

16,21 

22 

2 

18 

10,14 

11 

20 

14 

12 

8 

22 

4 

9 

3 

8 

17 

20 

13 

Well, deal 

Mr. 

the 

this 

of style 

Everson 

madam 

madam 

of about 

a - - operation 

ask 

was computed 

chronically 

madam 

District 

abusive 

referenced 

a 

precedence 

asking what's 

communicate 

date 

H 

Well, we'll deal 

Ms. 

that 

the 

styled 

Everson 

ma'am 

ma'am 

about 

a losing operation 

asked 

computed 

chronologically 

ma'am 

Federal District 

abuse of 

referenced manual 

to 

precedents 

asking you what's 

conamunicate with 

data 

M 

-2-
84 1-2 

85 2 

85 13 

89 2 

94 9 

SO ORDERED. 

anythmg. It's 

precedence 

aimed 

Oh, 

nothing 

anything that's 

precedents 

aim 

No, 

nothing further. 

innie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative 

Attachment-Service List 

-3-
FAA Docket No. CPlOSOOOl 1 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 bidependence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^30 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Michael Selig, MD, FACC, CFI-H, 

Respondent's Representative 

2816 Orefield Road 

Allentown, PA 18104 

TEL: 610-360-3953 

FAX: 

Laura Ponto, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Enforcement Division/AGC-300 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

TEL: 202-267-9863 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room E12-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2142 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

^ Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, 

Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-^30. \ 

-4-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41128

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PEDRO SANCHEZ-ALBA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:15-CR-565-1

Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Pedro Sanchez-Alba raises 

an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d 

198, 204-05 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 136 S. Ct. 533 (2015). In Martinez-Lugo, 

782 F.3d at 204-05, we held that an enhancement under U.S.S.G. 

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) for a prior felony conviction of a drug trafficking offense is 

warranted regardless whether the conviction for the prior offense required 

proof of remuneration or commercial activity. Accordingly, the motion for 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 20, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41128 Document: 00513472038 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
No. 15-41128

2

summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-41128 Document: 00513472038 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7404 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7404

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 10, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To require annual reports on counter illicit cross-border tunnel 
                  operations, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Subterranean Border Defense Act''.

SEC. 2. ANNUAL REPORTS ON COUNTER ILLICIT CROSS-BORDER TUNNEL 
              OPERATIONS.

    Paragraph (2) of section 7134(a) of the James M. Inhofe National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263; 6 
U.S.C. 257 note) is amended by inserting ``and annually thereafter'' 
after ``development of the strategic plan''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 9, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>            THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
                    INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
                    UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND
                    FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 27, 1997,
                    AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
                    REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000
       
<S>                                           <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-3-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-27-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<CASH>                                             10,286
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     109,240
<ALLOWANCES>                                          480
<INVENTORY>                                        75,758
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  239,023
<PP&E>                                            195,818
<DEPRECIATION>                                     57,290
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    509,842
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             201,820
<BONDS>                                             1,915
<COMMON>                                           46,828
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        215,076
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      509,842
<SALES>                                         1,245,335
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                1,245,335
<CGS>                                           1,059,534
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   1,059,534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    86,241
<INCOME-TAX>                                       34,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                51,841
<DISCONTINUED>                                        759
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                       52,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        1.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        1.07

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATIONS





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, each of
the undersigned officers of Discovery Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby
certifies that our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2009(the “Report”) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date: March 10,
      2010/s/ s/ W. Thomas
      AmickW. Thomas Amick, Chairman of the
      Boardand Principal Executive
      Officer/s/ John G.
      CooperJohn G.
    CooperExecutive VicePresident,Chief Financial
      Officer





A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
SEC or its staff upon request.




This certification is being furnished
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be
deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 7137

CHRISTOPHER PAGE ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
UNKNOWN CORRECTIONAL OFFICER; SGT. KREGOR; UNKNOWN MEDICAL STAFF MEMBERS DOCTOR BUCKHAM; COUNTY OF PITT ,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. ( 5:21

- ct

- 03007

- M )

Submitted : November 18, 2021 Decided: November 22, 2021

Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Christopher Page , Appellant Pro Se

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Christopher Page appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by th e

district court. Page v. Unknown Corr. Officer , No. 5:21

- ct

- 03007

- M (E.D.N.C. July 19,
2021) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid t he
decisional process.

AFFIRMED
38647.

#### STATE OF GEORGIA *et al.*v. SMALLWOOD.

Nichols, Judge.

1. The “Revenue Bond Law” (Ga. L. 1937, p. 761; *Code Ann.*Ch. 87-8), setting forth the procedures when municipalities desire to issue revenue bonds provides: That within six months after the resolution is passed authorizing such bonds written notice of such fact shall be given to the solicitor-general (or in certain cases the Attorney-General, *Code Ann.*§ 87-815), and that within twenty days after such notice is received the solicitor-general, or the Attorney-General as the case may be, shall file a petition in the name of the State in the superior court of the county wherein such municipality is located to have such bonds validated. *Code Ann.*§ 87-816.

2. Where the solicitor-general, or the Attorney-General, fails to file such petition within the twenty day period, any petition filed, without a prior order of court directing such filing, is a nullity. See *Roff v. Town of Calhoun,*110 Ga. 806 (36 S.E. 214).

3. Where the failure to file such petition within the requisite twenty-day period is not because of the fault or negligence of the municipality on application of the municipality in writing and upon a showing of such fact the superior court is authorized to order the solicitor-general to file such petition within ten days thereafter. *Code Ann.*§ 87-822.

4. Any citizen of this State who is a resident of the municipality seeking to have bonds validated may become a party *401to such proceeding and oppose the validation of such bonds. *Code Ann.*§ 87-818.

Decided March 9, 1961

Rehearing denied March 20, 1961.

*Alfred A. Quillian, Solicitor-General, E. C. Stark, J. C. Murphy,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Guy B. Scott, Jr.,*contra.

5. The superior court may upon its own motion take cognizance of what has transpired on a former hearing of the case *(Howell v. State,*162 Ga. 14, 20, 134 S. E. 59; *Reserve Life Ins. Co. v. Peavy,*98 Ga. App. 268, 272, 105 S. E. 2d 465), and the pleadings, being a part of the record, are judicially recognized by the court and need not be introduced in evidence. *Dixon v. Weatherly,*56 Ga. App. 406 (1) (195 S. E. 830).

6. Under the above authorities an intervention filed by a resident and taxpayer of the municipality proposing to issue revenue bonds which seeks to have the validation denied and the proceedings dismissed because such petition was not filed in conformity with such laws is not subject to demurrer.

7. A final judgment that denies the judgment validating the bonds is not error where the solicitor-general, who is required to file such petition within twenty days after being served with notice of the resolution proposing the issuance of such bonds, has failed to timely file such petition and the written application of the municipality (a part of the record), seeking to have such petition filed shows on its face that such petition was not timely filed because of its “mistake and misunderstanding of time limitations.”

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Bell, concur.*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0029

_________________

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

TERESA MOCKO,

 Defendant and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Appellant Teresa Mocko was granted an extension of time to file and serve the 

opening brief on or before January 5, 2024. The opening brief is now overdue.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Appellant shall prepare, file, and serve the 

opening brief on appeal no later than February 20, 2024. Failure to file the brief within 

that time will result in dismissal of this appeal with prejudice and without further notice. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all parties. 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 17 2024

01/17/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0029
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                            APPROVAL BY DIRECTORS OF
                         BANCWEST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                                       AND
                                BANK OF THE WEST


        The undersigned, all of the members of the Board of Directors of
Bancwest Financial Corporation ("Bancwest") and its wholly owned subsidiary,
Bank of the West, approve the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated November 10,
1998 (the "Plan"), between United Security Bancorporation, Bancwest and Bank of
the West and, except as otherwise required by applicable law, including, without
limitation, their fiduciary duties to Bancwest's shareholders, agree to (a) vote
their shares in favor of the transactions contemplated by the Plan, (b)
recommend to the shareholders of the Bank that they approve the Plan, and (c)
refrain from any actions or omissions inconsistent with such transactions or
recommendation.

        This Approval may be executed in one or more facsimile counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which taken together will
constitute one and the same document.




-----------------------------------    -----------------------------------------
Harold Cochran                         Mark Graves




-----------------------------------    -----------------------------------------
Wes Colley                             Allen Ketelson




-----------------------------------    -----------------------------------------
David Frame                            Norm McKibben
#### § 2000.930 Debarring official.

The Debarring Official for the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the Director, Office of Administration.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 138 (Thursday, July 18, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17392]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Executive Office for Immigration Review

8 CFR Part 1003

Professional Conduct for Practitioners

CFR Correction

0
In Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations, revised as of January 1, 
2013, on page 857, in Sec.  1003.108, the following words are added to 
the end of the second sentence in paragraph (a): ``before the filing of 
a Notice of Intent to Discipline.''

[FR Doc. 2013-17392 Filed 7-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

39 40 41 42



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 08/07 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 07 Aug 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL