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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE UNAUDITED
BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,621
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,660
<ALLOWANCES>                                       973
<INVENTORY>                                     16,522
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,219
<PP&E>                                         246,755
<DEPRECIATION>                                 114,980
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 205,328
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,422
<BONDS>                                        140,061
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,487
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   205,328
<SALES>                                        203,980
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               220,132
<CGS>                                           57,607
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  168,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                47,173
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   321<F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,891
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,012
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,012
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,012
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>THE PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS AND NOTES IS PRESENTED WITHIN OPERATING
EXPENSES IN THE ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS INCLUDED IN TOTAL COSTS
ABOVE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 792.14 Who is responsible for responding to my request?

The Freedom of Information Officer or designee is responsible for making the initial determination whether to grant or deny a request for information submitted to the Central Office Information Center. The Inspector General or designee is responsible for making the initial determination whether to grant or deny a request for information submitted to the Inspector General Information Center. This official may refer a request to an NCUA employee who is familiar with the subject area of the request. Other NCUA staff members may aid the official by providing information, advice, recommending a decision, or implementing a decision, but no NCUA employee other than an authorized official may make the initial determination. Referral of a request by the official to an employee will not affect the time limitation imposed in § 792.15 unless the request involves an unusual circumstance as provided in § 792.16.

[63 FR 14338, Mar. 25, 1998, as amended at 68 FR 61737, Oct. 30, 2003]
#### CUNNINGHAM v. CLARKSON.

Bail — liability of a security for the prmcipal~?>privity.

' The bail for A. and B. sued, cannot look to one who was jointly liable with A. and B. for the debt on account of which lie went bail — there is no privity between such persons.

Debt, for *money*paid, laid out and expended. Plea *nil debet.*The plaintiff to support his action offered a Kentucky record in evidence, from which it appeared, that A. brought a joint suit against four persons including the defendant. The process was served on the other three, and judgment and execution was had against them. A levy was made on goods which were replevied and a replevy bond given, with the present plaintiff as security, and that the defendant had been made liable to execution on the replevin bond. This was stated to be the whole evidence for the plaintiff. x

*E. King,*for the defendant,

objected to the evidence, and cited 3 *Ohio R.*41.

*Storer*and *Fox,*contra,

insisted that this was an equitable action, and as the defendant was one of those originally liable for the debt, the payment by the defendant was for his advantage, and therefore he is liable as for money, paid by him. They cited 8 *T. R.*308.

By the Court.

The claim of the plaintiff is as *bail,*for A. B. and C. who were jointly liable for a sum of money to a stranger. There is no privity between the plaintiff and this defendant. Bail may resort to his principal for indemnity; but not to another person, merely because that other person was liable for the same original debt, and *might*be liable over to the principal of the *bail,*if he were *218compelled to pay. The case in 8 *T. R.*308 is not analogous — that in the 3 O. *R.*42, seems exactly in point, and against the plaintiff’s claim. The testimony is inadmissible.

The plaintiff then submitted tb a non suit.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                             Rexall Sundown, Inc.

                                 Subsidiaries


1.   Rexall Showcase International, Inc.

2.   Rexall Showcase International de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.

3.   Importadora Rexall Showcase International de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.

4.   Servicios Rexall Showcase International de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.

5.   Asociacion de Vendedores Independientes en Rexall, A.C.

6.   Rexall Korea Limited

7.   RSL Holdings, Inc.
xjtexhibit105




	
EXHIBIT 10.5







First Amendment to

Employee Benefits Separation Agreement




            This First Amendment to Employee Benefits Separation
Agreement (this “Amendment”), dated as of March 27, 2003, is by and among Continental Airlines, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (“Continental”), ExpressJet Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“ExpressJet
Holdings”), XJT Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of ExpressJet Holdings
(“XJT Holdings”), and ExpressJet Airlines, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of XJT
Holdings (“ExpressJet Airlines”).


            WHEREAS, Continental, ExpressJet Holdings, XJT Holdings and
ExpressJet Airlines, are parties to that certain Employee Benefits Separation Agreement dated as of April 17, 2002 (the
“Separation Agreement”) and desire to amend the Separation Agreement as more fully set forth herein;


            NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as
follows:


            Section 1.14 of the Separation Agreement is hereby amended to
read in its entirety as follows:


            “Exclusivity Ending Date means the day immediately
preceding the earlier of (a) January 1, 2007, and (b) the first date on which Continental is free to utilize regional jet capacity
of a carrier other than ExpressJet Airlines in or out of Continental’s hubs.”


            Except as specifically amended hereby, the Separation
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and is ratified in all respects by the parties hereto.


            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to
be duly executed as of the date first above written.



	
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC.





	
            

	
EXPRESSJET HOLDINGS, INC.






	
	
	


 /s/ Jeffrey A.
Smisek                         

		


 /s/ James B.
Ream                           


	
Jeffrey J. Misner

 Executive Vice President

		
James B. Ream

 President and Chief Executive Officer


	
   

		
	
XJT HOLDINGS, INC.





	
            

	
EXPRESSJET AIRLINES, INC.






	


 /s/ James B.
Ream                         

		


 /s/ James B.
Ream                           


	
James B. Ream

 President and Chief Executive Officer

		
James B. Ream

 President and Chief Executive Officer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**310 CAF 10-01172**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND GORSKI, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF MICHAEL KAPUSCINSKI, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
GISELLE JELLETT, RESPONDENT-PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

MELVIN & MELVIN, PLLC, SYRACUSE (ELIZABETH A. GENUNG OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
WALTER J. BURKARD, DEWITT, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
KELLY M. CORBETT, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, FAYETTEVILLE, FOR BRAYDIN K. AND BRENTEN K.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Martha E. Mulroy, J.), entered August 4, 2009 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, granted sole custody of the parties’ children to petitioner-respondent. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court.

Entered: March 25, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
§ 791.4 Methods of acting. ( a ) *Board meetings* — ( 1 ) *Applicability of the Sunshine Act.* The Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b, “Sunshine Act”) requires that joint deliberations of the Board be held in accordance with its open meetings provisions (5 U.S.C. 552b (b) through (f)). (Subpart C of this part contains NCUA's regulations implementing the Sunshine Act.)
( 2 ) *Presiding officer.* The Chairman is the presiding officer, and in the Chairman's absence, the designated Vice Chairman shall preside. The presiding officer shall make procedural rulings. Any Board member may appeal a ruling made by the presiding officer. The appeal of a procedural ruling by the presiding officer shall be immediately considered by the Board, and a majority decision by the Board shall decide the procedural ruling.
( b ) *Notation voting.* Notation voting is the circulation of written memoranda and voting sheets to the office of each Board member simultaneously and the tabulation of responses. ( 1 ) *Matters that may be decided by notation voting.* Notation voting may be used only for administrative or time sensitive matters, for example, enforcement or interagency actions requiring prompt Board action matters.
( 2 ) *Notation vote sheets.* Notation vote sheets will be used to record the vote tally on a notation vote. The Secretary of the Board has administrative responsibility over notation voting, including the authority to establish deadlines for voting, receive notation vote sheets, count votes, and determine whether further action is required.
( 3 ) *Veto of notation voting.* In view of public policy for openness reflected in the Sunshine Act, each Board member is authorized to veto the use of notation voting for the consideration of any particular matter, and thus requires that the matter be placed on the agenda of the next regularly scheduled Board meeting that is held at least ten days after the date of the veto.
( 4 ) *Disclosure of result.* A record is to be maintained of Board transactions by use of the notation voting procedure. Public disclosure of this record is determined by the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).
[53 FR 29647, Aug. 8, 1988, as amended at 62 FR 64267, Dec. 5, 1997; 70 FR 55517, Sept. 22, 2005; 75 FR 34623, June 18, 2010]
EXHIBIT 21

                           SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES

                                                                NAME UNDER
                                             STATE OR OTHER     WHICH SUBSIDIARY
                                             JURISDICTION       CONDUCTS
    NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                       OF INCORPORATION   BUSINESS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isogen International, LLC                      Delaware          Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Innodata India (Private) Limited                India            Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Innodata XML Content Factory, Inc.           Philippines         Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESS Manufacturing Company, Inc.              Philippines         Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content Online Services, Inc.                Philippines         Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Innodata Asia Holdings, Limited                Bermuda           Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Innodata Lanka (Private) Limited              Sri Lanka          Same
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 797.10 Special review. ( a ) An employee subject to offset, or a voluntary repayment agreement, may, at any time, request a special review by the Executive Director of the amount of the offset or voluntary repayment, based on materially changed circumstances, including, but not limited to, catastrophic illness, divorce, death, or disability.
( b ) To determine whether an offset would prevent the employee from meeting essential subsistence expenses, the employee shall submit a detailed statement and supporting documents for the employee, the employee's spouse, and dependents indicating the employee's assets and liabilities.
( c ) If the employee requests a special review under this section, the employee shall file an alternative proposed offset or payment schedule and a statement.
( d ) The Executive Director shall evaluate the statement and supporting documents, and determine whether the original offset or repayment schedule imposes an undue financial hardship on the employee. The Executive Director shall notify the employee in writing within 30 calendar days of such determination, including, if appropriate, a revised offset or payment schedule. If the special review results in a revised offset or repayment schedule, NCUA shall provide a new certification to the paying agency.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7698** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. ALBERT EUGENE HARDY, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville
. Martin K. Reidinger , District Judge. ( 1:07

- cr - 00010

- MR

- 1 )

Submitted : January 31, 2013 Decided: February 7, 2013

Before KEENAN and WYNN , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Albert Eugene Hardy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinio ns are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Albert Eugene Hardy, Jr., appeals the district court ’ s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm fo r the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Hardy , No. 1:07

- cr - 00010

- MR

- 1 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 10 , 2012) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and ar gument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 

|                          |      |                                                                                                                                                               |
|-------------------------------|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:      May 20, 2008 | By:  | /s/      John      Hanna                             |
|                          |      | John      Hanna                                                                                                                                                    |
|                          |      | Chief      Executive Officer                                                                                                                                       |

|                          |      |                                                                                                           |
|-------------------------------|-----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:      May 20, 2008 | By:  | /s/      Michael P.      Robbins              |
|                          |      | Michael      P. Robbins                                                                                        |
|                          |      | Interim      Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting  Officer                                         |
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
ss.1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Datascension Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the "Report")"Report"), I,
Lou Persico, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Executive Officer of the
Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.


/s/
      Lou PersicoLOU
      PERSICO
                  CEO
      and Prin. Executive OfficerDated:
      August 10, 2009
§ 344.7 Settlement of securities transactions. ( a ) All contracts effected or entered into by an FDIC-supervised institution that provide for the purchase or sale of a security (other than an exempted security as defined in 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(12), government security, municipal security, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, or commercial bills) shall provide for completion of the transaction within the number of business days in the standard settlement cycle followed by registered broker dealers in the United States, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties at the time of the transaction. The number of business days in the standard settlement cycle shall be determined by reference to paragraph (a) of SEC Rule 15c6-1, 17 CFR 240.15c6-1(a).
( b ) Paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section shall not apply to contracts: ( 1 ) For the purchase or sale of limited partnership interests that are not listed on an exchange or for which quotations are not disseminated through an automated quotation system of a registered securities association; or
( 2 ) For the purchase or sale of securities that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may from time to time, taking into account then existing market practices, exempt by order from the requirements of paragraph (a) of SEC Rule 15c6-1, 17 CFR 240.15c6-1(a), either unconditionally or on specified terms and conditions, if the SEC determines that an exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.
( c ) Paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply to contracts for the sale for cash of securities that are priced after 4:30 p.m. Eastern time on the date the securities are priced and that are sold by an issuer to an underwriter pursuant to a firm commitment underwritten offering registered under the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq., or sold to an initial purchaser by an FDIC-supervised institution participating in the offering. An FDIC-supervised institution shall not effect or enter into a contract for the purchase or sale of the securities that provides for payment of funds and delivery of securities later than the fourth business day after the date of the contract unless otherwise expressly agreed to by the parties at the time of the transaction.
( d ) For the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section, the parties to a contract shall be deemed to have expressly agreed to an alternate date for payment of funds and delivery of securities at the time of the transaction for a contract for the sale for cash of securities pursuant to a firm commitment offering if the managing underwriter and the issuer have agreed to the date for all securities sold pursuant to the offering and the parties to the contract have not expressly agreed to another date for payment of funds and delivery of securities at the time of the transaction.
[78 FR 76723, Dec. 19, 2013, as amended at 83 FR 26349, June 7, 2018]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>                    Canadian dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                         SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           NOV-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                             1.5237
<CASH>                                   1,188,138
<SECURITIES>                             1,998,892
<RECEIVABLES>                            2,892,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                53,000
<INVENTORY>                                193,095
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         7,061,996
<PP&E>                                   5,740,037
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          16,413,550
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    2,703,532
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                 10,917
<COMMON>                                   162,484
<OTHER-SE>                              11,050,728
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            16,413,550
<SALES>                                  3,636,117
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         3,636,117
<CGS>                                    1,234,496
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            1,234,496
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         1,731,046
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             7,115
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          43,025
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            268,253
<INCOME-TAX>                               103,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        190,951
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               190,951
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0.07
                                


</TABLE>
§ 101.7 Hazardous operations. ( a ) No person may operate any moored balloon, kite, amateur rocket, or unmanned free balloon in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons, or their property.
( b ) No person operating any moored balloon, kite, amateur rocket, or unmanned free balloon may allow an object to be dropped therefrom, if such action creates a hazard to other persons or their property.
(Sec. 6(c), Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)))
[Doc. No. 12800, 39 FR 22252, June 21, 1974, as amended at 74 FR 38092, July 31, 2009]