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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         58795
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
Rockingham

No. 6210

#### Luther Coleman v. Town of Seabrook *& a.*

October 31, 1973

*Paul A. Rinden*for the plaintiff, filed no brief.

*Robert G. Tetler,*by brief and orally, for the defendants.

Per curiam.

The issue raised by this petition to quiet title *546to land in Seabrook is the legality of defendants’ title based on a tax deed to the town dated 1957, recorded in 1964, and on a deed from the town to the individual defendants dated 1964 and recorded in 1965.

In 1967 plaintiff obtained a deed from an heir of the taxpayer. His claim is based on certain alleged technical defects in notice and other aspects of the tax sale. After trial by the court, the petition was denied and the plaintiff’s exceptions were transferred by *Grant,*J. We have examined the plaintiff’s claims and find them to be without merit as there was substantial compliance with the requirements of a valid tax sale. *Coleman v. Hooksett,*111 N.H. 337, 283 A.2d 681 (1971).

*Judgment for the defendants.*
#### § 780.134 Performance “on a farm” generally.

If a practice is not performed by a farmer, it must, among other things, be performed “on a farm” to come within the secondary meaning of “agriculture” in section 3(f). Any practice which cannot be performed on a farm, such as “delivery to market,” is necessarily excluded, therefore, when performed by someone other than a farmer (see *Farmers Reservoir Co.* v. *McComb,* 337 U.S. 755; *Chapman* v. *Durkin,* 214 F. 2d 360, cert. denied 348 U.S. 897; *Fort Mason Fruit Co.* v. *Durkin,* 214 F. 2d 363, cert. denied 348 U.S. 897). Thus, employees of an alfalfa dehydrator engaged in hauling chopped or unchopped alfalfa away from the farms to the dehydrating plant are not employed in a practice performed “on a farm.”
§ 784.140 Fabrication and handling of supplies for use in named operations. ( a ) As noted in § 784.109, the exemption for employees employed “in” the named operations does not extend to an employee by reason of the fact that he engages in fabricating supplies for the named operations. Employment in connection with the furnishing of supplies for the processing or canning operations named in section 13(b)(4) is not exempt as employment “in” such named operations unless the functional relationship of the work to the actual conduct of the named operations is such that, as a practical matter, the employment is directly and necessarily a part of the operations for which exemption is intended. Employees who meet the daily needs of the canning or processing operations by delivering from stock, handling, and working on supplies such as salt, condiments, cleaning supplies, containers, etc., which must be provided as needed if the named operations are to continue, are within the exemption because such work is, in practical effect, a part of the operations for which exemption is intended. On the other hand, the receiving, unloading, and storing of such supplies during seasons when the named operations are not being carried on for subsequent use in the operations expected to be performed during the active season, are ordinarily too remote from the actual conduct of the named operations to come within the exemption (see § 784.113), and are not affected by the natural factors (§ 784.137) which were considered by the Congress to constitute a fundamental reason for providing the exemption. Whether the receiving, unloading, and storing of supplies during periods when the named operations are being carried on are functionally so related to the actual conduct of the operations as to be, in practical effect, a part of the named operations and within the exemption, will depend on all the facts and circumstances of the particular situation and the manner in which the named operations are carried on. Normally where such activities are directed to building up stock for use at a relatively remote time and there is no direct integration with the actual conduct of the named operations, the exemption will not apply.
( b ) It may be that employees are engaged in the same workweek in performing exempt and nonexempt work. For example, a shop machinist engaged in making a new part to be used in the repair of a machine currently used in canning operations would be doing exempt work. If he also in the same workweeks makes parts to be used in a manufacturing plant operated by his employer, this work, since it does not directly or necessarily contribute to the conduct of the canning operations, would be nonexempt work causing the loss of the exemption if such work occupied a substantial amount (for enforcement purposes, more than 20 percent) of the employee's worktime in that workweek (see § 784.116 for a more detailed discussion).
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31155-31156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12219]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. MT00-6-000]


Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of Tariff 
Filing

May 10, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 4, 2000, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas 
Transmission LLC (KMIGT) tendered for filing revisions to its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No 1-B, First Revised Sheet Nos 3, 55 and 
56 and Second Revised Volume No. 1-D, First Revised Sheet Nos. 3, 48 
and 49.
    KMIGT states that on April 5, 2000, Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI) 
closed on a transaction with ONEOK, Inc. (ONEOK) whereby various assets 
and entities were transferred to ONEOK, including all entities that 
were then marketing affiliates of KMIGT. As a result of the 
transaction, KMI states that it no longer has a marketing affiliate and 
is revising the tariff accordingly.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance

[[Page 31156]]

with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This 
filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-12219 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
§ 94.640 Employee. ( a ) *Employee* means the employee of a recipient directly engaged in the performance of work under the award, including— ( 1 ) All direct charge employees;
( 2 ) All indirect charge employees, unless their impact or involvement in the performance of work under the award is insignificant to the performance of the award; and
( 3 ) Temporary personnel and consultants who are directly engaged in the performance of work under the award and who are on the recipient's payroll.
( b ) This definition does not include workers not on the payroll of the recipient (*e.g.,* volunteers, even if used to meet a matching requirement; consultants or independent contractors not on the payroll; or employees of subrecipients or subcontractors in covered workplaces).
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 21

                          SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT
                          --------------------------


                                                      Jurisdiction of     
               Name                                   Incorporation       
               ----                                   -------------       
                                                                          
         Cybex Financial Corporation                  New York            
                                                                          
         Eagle Performance Systems, Inc.              Minnesota           
                                                                          
         Cybex Fitness Gerate Vertriebs, GmbH         Germany             
                                                                          
         General Medical Equipment, Ltd.              U.S. Virgin Islands 
                                                                          
         Lumex Bed Systems, Inc                       Pennsylvania        
                                                                          
         Trotter Inc.                                 Delaware            
                                                                          
         Trotter Holding Company                      Delaware
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Public  Company  Accounting  Reform  and
Investor  Protection  Act of 2002 (18  U.S.C.ss.  1350,  as adopted),  I, Dianne
Hatton-Ward, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies that, to the best of his or her knowledge:

     1. The  Company's  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
30,  2004,  and to which this  Certification  is attached  as Exhibit  99.1 (the
"PERIODIC  REPORT")  fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  of the Company at the end of the
period  covered by the Periodic  Report and results of operations of the Company
for the period covered by the Periodic Report.

Dated: August 9, 2004


S/ Dianne Hatton-Ward
---------------------
Dianne Hatton-Ward
CEO & CFO

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Yummies, Inc. and will be retained by Yummies, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request

THIS  CERTIFICATION   ACCOMPANIES  THIS  REPORT  PURSUANT  TO  SS.  906  OF  THE
SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED  "FILED" BY THE  COMPANY FOR
PURPOSES OF SECTION 18 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 2, 2011 

p0126 

Order 

 

February 2, 2011 

141515 

MICHAEL E. TINDALL, 

Plaintiff, 

v SC: 141515 

 AGC: 0363/09 

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and 

the Grievance Administrator is DIRECTED to provide the plaintiff with a copy of the 

respondent attorney’s answer, as well as a copy of the respondent’s supporting 

documents, unless the Administrator determines that there is cause for not disclosing 

some or all of the supporting documents.
Exhibit 31.1

SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATION

Principal Executive and Principal Financial Officer

I, Robert Kinloch, certify that:

1. 	I have reviewed this quarterly report of Maverick Minerals Corp.;

2. 	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

4. 	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

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

b) 	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

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

5. 	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) 	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) 	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date: May 18, 2005 | /s/ Robert Kinloch                                 
|------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------
|                   | Robert Kinloch                                     
|                   | Principal Executive and Principal Financial Officer



---
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Robert Kinloch, Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of Maverick Minerals Corporation (the Company), hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(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.

Dated: November 12, 2010

/s/Robert KinlochRobert KinlochChief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 984 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 984

                    For the relief of Jiao Ying Li.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 26, 2007

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    For the relief of Jiao Ying Li.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Jiao Ying Li 
shall be considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States 
for permanent residence as of the date of the enactment of this Act 
upon payment of the required visa fees.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

    Upon the granting of permanent resident status to Jiao Ying Li, as 
provided in section 1, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
officer to reduce by 1 during the current or next following fiscal year 
the total number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country 
of the birth of Jiao Ying Li under section 202(a)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(2)).
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-4019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ZACHARY JEREMIAH HOOVER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, District Judge. (CR-05-75) Submitted: October 31, 2006 Decided: November 3, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Zachary J. Hoover appeals the 18-month sentence imposed after he pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to a criminal information charging him with sexual abuse of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2243(a) (2000). We affirm. Hoover’s sole argument on appeal is that the Government breached the plea agreement by stating to the court at sentencing that the court did not need to decide whether Hoover should register as a sex offender. Hoover did not object below, and he must therefore demonstrate plain error before he can obtain any relief. SeeUnited States v. Fant , 974 F.2d 559, 562 (4th Cir. 1992) (applying plain error analysis in context of breach of plea agreement). In order to do so, Hoover must establ ish the breach was “‘so obvious and substantial that failure to notice and correct it affect[ed] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of the judicial proceedings.’” United States v. McQueen , 108 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 1997) (quoting Fant , 974 F.2d at 565). Our review of the record convinces us that the Government did not breach the plea agreement in responding to the district court’s questions at sentencing. Accordingly, we affirm Hoover’s sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are- 3 - adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 780.815 Basic conditions of exemption; second part, processing of sugar beets, sugar-beet molasses, sugarcane, or maple sap. Under the second part of section 13(b)(15) of the Act, the following conditions must be met in order for the exemption to apply to an employee: ( a ) He must be engaged in the processing of sugar beets, sugar-beet molasses, sugarcane, or maple sap.
( b ) The product of the processing must be sugar (other than refined sugar) or syrup.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          14,369
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   92,514
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,398
<INVENTORY>                                     30,960
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               130,245
<PP&E>                                          51,335
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,709
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 166,276
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          205,587
<BONDS>                                         50,162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            6,898
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (96,371)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   166,276
<SALES>                                        221,125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               221,125
<CGS>                                          147,270
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  331,865
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,054
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,081
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (45,243)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (45,243)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (45,243)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.01)


</TABLE>