alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1

                 Amen Properties Reports First Quarter Results

         Emphasis on Energy-Related Businesses Delivers Strong Earnings
                             Growth Year-over-Year

     MIDLAND, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 14, 2007--Amen Properties today
announced financial results for its fiscal 2007 first quarter ended March 31,
2007. The Company posted revenue of $3.1 million and a net quarterly profit of
$508,923, or $0.13 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $3.9
million and net quarterly profit of $192,654, or $0.05 per diluted share, in the
year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 14.8%, up from 7.2% in the year-ago quarter.
Energy Management and Consulting sales accounted for 26% of the quarter's
revenue.

     Retail Electricity revenue declined 27% despite a 2% increase in volume due
to savings associated with lower wholesale energy costs being passed on to
consumers. The remainder of the decline in operating revenue was caused by the
company's withdrawal from the real estate market in late 2006 in order to focus
on energy-related opportunities.

     "We are very pleased to report strong earnings growth over last year," said
Kris Oliver, Amen Properties' CFO. "We see this quarter's performance as a
validation of our decision to deemphasize our real estate businesses and focus
on energy-related opportunities. We are particularly enthusiastic about our
growth in energy management services through the acquisition of Priority Power
in 2006."

     Amen Properties is engaged in the acquisition and management of strong,
profitable energy-related businesses. W Power & Light, a wholly-owned
subsidiary, is a Retail Electricity Provider in Texas, the largest electricity
marketplace in the United States. Priority Power, a wholly-owned subsidiary
acquired in April 2006, is an energy management and consulting services firm.
ChooseEnergy.com, launched in 2006, is an unbiased online electricity
marketplace which allows consumers to compare offers and save money by selecting
an electricity provider that meets their needs. The Company has other energy
-related holdings through its other subsidiaries, Amen Minerals and Amen
Delaware.


     CONTACT: Amen Properties, Inc., Midland
              Press/Investor Relations Contact:
              Kris Oliver, 432-684-3821
# Euroopan unionin C 57A/17.

| | ISSN 1977-1053 |
| --- | --- |
| Euroopan unionin
  virallinen lehti | C 57A |
| | |
| Suomenkielinen laitos | Tiedonantoja ja ilmoituksia | 58. vuosikerta17. helmikuu 2015 |

ISSN 1977-1053

Euroopan unionin

virallinen lehti

C 57A

Suomenkielinen laitos

Tiedonantoja ja ilmoituksia

58. vuosikerta17. helmikuu 2015

---

| Ilmoitusnumero | Sisältö | Sivu |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Oikaisuja |
| 2015/C 057A/01 | Oikaisu ilmoitukseen avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 – sihteerit/virkailijat (SC 1 ja SC 2) seuraavilla erikoisaloilla: 1. hallinnon tuki, 2. varainhoidon tuki, 3. sihteeripalvelut ( EUVL C 3 A, 8.1.2015 ) | 1 |

Ilmoitusnumero

Sisältö

Sivu

Oikaisuja

2015/C 057A/01

Oikaisu ilmoitukseen avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 – sihteerit/virkailijat (SC 1 ja SC 2) seuraavilla erikoisaloilla: 1. hallinnon tuki, 2. varainhoidon tuki, 3. sihteeripalvelut ( EUVL C 3 A, 8.1.2015 )

( EUVL C 3 A, 8.1.2015 )

1

---

| FI | |
| --- | --- |

FI

---

Oikaisuja

| 17.2.2015 | FI | Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti | CA 57/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2015

FI

Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti

CA 57/1

---

Oikaisu ilmoitukseen avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 – sihteerit/virkailijat (SC 1 ja SC 2) seuraavilla erikoisaloilla: 1. hallinnon tuki, 2. varainhoidon tuki, 3. sihteeripalvelut

(
  Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti C 3 A, 8. tammikuuta 2015
  )

(2015/C 057 A/01)

Sivulla 2, I luvun 3 kohdassa:

| on: | ”Määräaika (validointi mukaan lukien): 10. helmikuuta 2015 klo 12.00 Brysselin aikaa.” |
| --- | --- |

on:

”Määräaika (validointi mukaan lukien): 10. helmikuuta 2015 klo 12.00 Brysselin aikaa.”

| pitää olla: | ”Määräaika (validointi mukaan lukien): 17. helmikuuta 2015 klo 12.00 Brysselin aikaa.” |
| --- | --- |

pitää olla:

”Määräaika (validointi mukaan lukien): 17. helmikuuta 2015 klo 12.00 Brysselin aikaa.”

---
From: trazz67@catholic.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:27:28 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Tom Radziewicz

Belleville, NJ 07109
From: bush-master@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:01:08 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Terry Bush

Houston, TX 77084
Exhibit 10.2


 


	

Original 

Amount	 	



Bank	 	Payment 

Terms/Monthly 

Installment	 	



Due Date	 	

Interest 

Rate	 	



Collateral	 	



Comments
	R$2,000,000	 	Itau	 	12 Installment	 	February 12, 2014	 	1.09% am	 	Receivables & Personal Guarantee of Officer of our Brazilian Subsidiary	 	We will have a two-month grace period for installment payments
Case No. 12,888.

#### In re SIMS.

[16 N. B. R. (1878) 251.] 1

District Court, E. D. Michigan.

Bankruptcy — Mortgage Given Apter Commencement of Proceedings — Motion to Set Aside.

An assignee may petition summarily to set aside a mortgage given after the commencement of proceedings in bankruptcy. Resort to a bill in equity is unnecessary.

[See Case No. 12,889.]

On petition of assignee to set aside mortgage. A creditor’s petition was filed against Stephen Sims July 11, 1870. On July 20th he gave a mortgage to Atkinson & Atkinson, to secure their pay for services to be rendered by them in resisting the creditor’s petition. He was duly adjudicated a bankrupt October 23d.

Burt & Burritt, for assignee.

Mr. Atkinson, in pro. per.

1

 [Reprinted by permission.]

BROWN, District Judge.

Respondents defended solely upon the ground that this court has no jurisdiction to proceed, summarily, to set aside the mortgage, and claim that the assignee must be driven to a bill in equity. In support of this position, the cases of Smith v. Mason, 14 Wall. [81 U. S.] 419; Marshall v. Knox, 16 Wall. [83 U. S.] 551; and In re Marter [Case No. 9,143], decided by this court, are relied upon. ■ I am clearly of the opinion that these cases have no application to a proceeding like the one' under consideration, where it is sought to-set aside a mortgage given by the bankrupt after proceedings in bankruptcy have been commenced. The rule, in the opinions above cited, has been confined to cases where the adverse party claims an absolute title and dominion .over the property of the bankrupt acquired by him prior to the proceedings in bankruptcy. The title of the assignee relates back to the commencement of those proceedings, and a mortgage upon the estate taken after that, is virtually an incumbrance upon the property of the assignee. While the taking of such mortgage is not unlawful, and the same would constitute a valid incumbrance upon the property, if the petition were dismissed, of course the mortgagee must assume the risk of being required to release it, if the petition is sustained. Where the property affected by the lien is confessedly the property of the bankrupt, and lias passed to the assignee, and it only remains to ascertain and liquidate the alleged lien, the summary jurisdiction of this court is entirely adequate. In re Clark [Id. 2,801]; In re Ulrich [Id. 14.328]; Ex parte Bryan [Id. 2.061]. An order will be entered requiring the mortgagees to release the mortgage.
| 1.     | SuchAnnual Report of Form 10-K/A for the period ending May 31, 2010, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended May 31, 2010, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Zhong Sen International Tea Company. |

| Date:  May 23, 2011             |
|-------------------------------------------|
|                                      |
| Zhong Sen International Tea Company       |
|                                      |
| By: /s/ Binquan Zhang                |
| Binquan ZhangChief Financial Officer |
No. 62191.

#### S. S. Kresge Co. *v.*United States,

protests 225859-K and 226364-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of metal dime savings banks the same in all material respects as those the subject of *M. Pressner & Co.*v. *United States*(36 Cust. Ct. 262, C. D. 1784), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: rosaliebritton@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:46:44 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Rosalie Britton

Jacksonville, FL 32258
Case No. 8,796.

#### McGILL v. SHEEHEE.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 49.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Jan. Term, 1802.

Pleading at Law — Replication Withdrawn— Demurrer Substituted.

The plaintiff, in slander, may have leave to withdraw his general replication and file a general demurrer, and the court will give the defendant leave to change his plea.

[See Case No. 8,797.]

Leave was given to the plaintiff to withdraw his general replication to the defendant’s special justification, and file a general demurrer. The defendant had also leave to withdraw his plea, and offer another plea by Tuesday next.
No. 68105.

#### Coles Cranes, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 61/6136-11769, 61/12020-12243, and 61/6137-11775 (Chicago).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of mobile cranes or parts thereof similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67483, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

March 7, 1967

No. P67/57.

#### National Silver Company *v.*United States,

protests 63/11967, etc. (Los Angeles).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of cups and saucers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *W. Kay Company, Inc.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 130, C.D. 2484), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: lorgeoste@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:00:44 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Lorraine Steinberg

Defuniak Springs, FL 32435
From: penelopead@wtc-mail.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:28:32 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Penelope Daugherty

Wolverton, MN 56594
Before the Second Division,

July 28, 1966

No. P66/173]. —

#### Sims-Worms, Inc. *v.*United States, protests 65/471, etc. (Los Angeles).

Bao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of waterproof twill back cotton velveteen cloth, which is similar in all material respects, including waterproofing, to velveteen cloth the subject of *Amity Fabrics, Inc.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 97, C.D. 2416), the claim of the plantiff was sustained.
Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Ave S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591

Response to letter received 11/9/2015

Dear Madam/Sir, 

We received a letter for additional information pertaining to Docket No. FAA-2015-2080

request for more information via email on 11/06/2015. I am representing Osprey Imaging, LLC’s 

request for exemption from §§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b), 91.103(b), 91.105, 

91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), 

91.417(a) and (b), and part 21, Subpart H, of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR).

Reasons Why Granting Exemption Would Be in Public Interest: 

Public Interest Granting this exemption would benefit the public as a whole. SUASs offer a 

strong equivalent level of safety, a reduction in environmental impacts, and are free from the 

harmful emissions associated with the manned aircraft that are currently used for aerial 

photography and videography. Due to the size of the SUAS and the tightly controlled and limited 

airspace in which the SUAS will operate, approval of this application presents no risk to the 

public. Furthermore, the public will be able to legally acquire aerial photography and 

videography to help in, but not limited to, advertising homes for sale, advertising uninhabited 

home lots, use of photos and video as an aid when researching homes for sale on the market, or 

safely accessing high and/or dangerous areas of a home’s exterior to assess damage that needs to

be repaired. Additionally, utilizing our SUAS aircraft will assist in congestion relief of the NAS. 

Respectfully Submitted.

William Granruth

President, Osprey Imaging LLC

william@ospreyimaging.com

99 Hamilton Ave

Greenwich, CT 06831

203 249 2342