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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           6,963
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             100
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     17,295
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          17,937
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            17,295
<LOANS>                                         60,359
<ALLOWANCE>                                        400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  92,422
<DEPOSITS>                                      83,727
<SHORT-TERM>                                       200
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                529
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,993
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,973
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  92,422
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,770
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  565
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   116
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,451
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,180
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,187
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,264
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       35
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,815
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    617
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         420
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       420
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.92
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                       238
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   372
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       10
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  400
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### Marie Tufano, Respondent, v Alfred Tufano, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d 778]

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals from (1) an order of the *408Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), dated January 27, 1993, which granted the plaintiff wife’s motion, *inter alia,*to direct him, pendente lite, to maintain the registration and insurance on an automobile for her use and to maintain her long distance telephone service, (2) so much of an order of the same court (Kutner, J.), entered February 5, 1993, as denied his motion to remove a related Family Court support proceeding to the Supreme Court, and (3) an order of the same court (Alpert, J.), entered September 14, 1994, which denied his motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order entered February 5, 1993, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated January 27, 1993, and the order entered September 14, 1994, are affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Because the divorce action was not commenced in the Supreme Court until after the commencement of the support proceeding, the Family Court had jurisdiction over that proceeding *(see, Matter of Spilman-Toll v Toll,*209 AD2d 1015). The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to transfer the Family Court support proceeding to the Supreme Court *(see, Kagen v Kagen,*21 NY2d 532, 537-538).

The Supreme Court properly awarded the plaintiff, pendente lite, the use of the automobile and properly directed the defendant to pay the insurance and the maintenance expenses of the automobile. The court also properly directed the defendant to maintain long-distance telephone service for the plaintiff and to pay $25 per month toward the cost of the long-distance service *(see, O’Connor v O’Connor,*207 AD2d 334; *Suydam v Suydam,*167 AD2d 752, 753).

The plaintiff commenced the divorce action in 1991, prior to the enactment of CPLR 306-a. In any event, it appears that the plaintiff did in fact purchase an index number. Any error in the transcription of that index number was a mere irregularity rather than a jurisdictional defect *(see,*CPLR 305; *Cellular Tel. Co. v Village of Tarrytown,*209 AD2d 57; *Chira v Global Med. Review,*160 Misc 2d 368; *Kleinman, Saltzman & Good-friend v Marshall,*158 Misc 2d 640).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court as they are raised for the first time on appeal, or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Balletta and Hart, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1









CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Laredo Oil, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended May 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Mark See, Chief Executive Officer and sole Director, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:




1.
The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.
The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.




A signed original 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.









Dated: September 14, 2010
By:
/s/ Mark SeeMark SeeChief Executive Officer and sole Director
No. 65221.

#### Kaufman & Vinson Co. *v.*United States,

protests 268947-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of marble slabs similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Lyons Transport*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 278, C.D. 2052), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 63401.

protest 58/22337 (New York).

#### Chilewich Sons & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Moilison, J.

At the trial, it was stipulated that an affidavit was produced showing that 9,589.40 feet, consisting of heads and girdles, were used for shoe leather and that had that affidavit been before the collector within the 90-day review period under section 515, Tariff Act of 1930, he would have *356liquidated the value of the items at 10 percent under paragraph 1530(c), as amended, *supra,*under paragraph 1530(g) of the act. On the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained to the extent of 9,589.40 feet, consisting of 505.75 feet of heads and 9,083.65 feet of girdles, of the leather covered by the involved entry.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

(PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 

(Shannon Edwards; #06-0058RSL)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

1 (206) 553-1100

 CHIEF JUDGE ROBERT S. LASNIK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SHANNON KRISTINA EDWARDS,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR 06-0058 RSL

ORDER GRANTING 

STIPULATED MOTION TO CONTINUE

TRIAL DATE 

THE COURT having considered the stipulated motion of the parties to continue the trial

date, the affidavit of defense counsel, and the records and files herein, the Court hereby makes

the following findings:

1. The Court finds that a failure to grant the continuance would deny counsel the

reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due

diligence, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii).

2. The Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by ordering the

continuance in this case and that the continuance is necessary to insure effective trial preparation

and that these factors outweigh the best interests of the public in a more speedy trial, within the

meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial date be continued from May 8, 2006, to

June 19, 2006.

Case 2:06-cr-00058-RSL Document 15 Filed 05/03/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

(PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 

(Shannon Edwards; #06-0058RSL)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

2 (206) 553-1100

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of time from the current trial date of May 8,

2006, up to and including the new proposed trial date of June 19, 2006, shall be excludable time

pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq. 

DONE this 3rd day of May, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Presented by:

s/ Robert H. Gombiner

WSBA # 16059

Attorney for Shannon K. Edwards

Federal Public Defender’s Office

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: (206) 553-1100

Fax: (206) 553-0120

robert_gombiner@fd.org

s/ Norman Barbosa

Assistant United States Attorney

Telephonic Approval

Case 2:06-cr-00058-RSL Document 15 Filed 05/03/06 Page 2 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

FERNANDO MARTINEZ-LOPEZ,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06-054M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offense charged: 

Illegal Reentry After Deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Date of Detention Hearing: February 8, 2006.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds

that no condition or combination of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure

the appearance of defendant as required or the safety of the community.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) A detainer has been placed on defendant by the Bureau of Immigration and

Customs Enforcement.

(2) Defendant was born in Mexico. There is no information available regarding any

ties to this community, or to the Western District of Washington.

Case 2:06-mj-00054-JPD Document 7 Filed 02/08/06 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

(3) Defendant has been previously deported to Mexico after removal proceedings on

or about March 11, 2003.

(4) Defendant has failed to appear in Court as required on three separate occasions.

(5) Defendant has stipulated to detention, due to the immigration detainer lodged

against him, but reserves the right to contest his continued detention if there is a change in

circumstances.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 7th day of February, 2006.AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-mj-00054-JPD Document 7 Filed 02/08/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 68502.

protests 62/4756, etc. (New York).

#### The Rembar Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

*334Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of integral, necessary components of electrical X-ray apparatus or instruments, which are not X-ray tubes or parts thereof, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,022
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,010
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,249)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,285
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,555
<PP&E>                                          15,688
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,314)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  28,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,581
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            17
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,413
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    28,011
<SALES>                                         33,007
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,007
<CGS>                                           22,354
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,595
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  85
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,027)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,027)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,207)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.12)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1

                           SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Mark A. Smith, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Bion
Environmental Technologies, Inc.;

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 quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the small business issuer 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 small business issuer,
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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and
the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 12, 2007


/s/ Mark A. Smith
Mark A. Smith
Chief Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer
Order entered September 24, 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 19

- 00669

- CV

HOMEADVISOR, INC. AN D ANGI HOMESERVICES INC., Appellant s

V.

ZAK WADDELL AND ELIZ ABETH WADDELL, ET AL., Appellee s

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 18

- 06796



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellees’ September 20, 2019 motion for extension of time to file

their brief. We GRANT the m otion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than October 21,

2019.

Appellant’s September 20, 2019 motion for emergency stay remains pending.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL

JUSTICE
# Official Journal C 268/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.268.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 268 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 532 October 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.268.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 268

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 532 October 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2010/C 268/01 | Council Decision of 27 September 2010 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training | 1 |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 268/02 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 1,00 % on 1 October 2010 — Euro exchange rates | 2 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2010/C 268/01

Council Decision of 27 September 2010 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

1

European Commission

2010/C 268/02

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 1,00 % on 1 October 2010 — Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 268/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6002 — Intel/GE/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 3 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 268/04 | State aid — France — State aid C 18/10 (ex NN 20/10 and ex CP 294/08) — Currency support for aeronautic suppliers — Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the TFEU (1) | 4 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2010/C 268/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6002 — Intel/GE/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

3

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2010/C 268/04

State aid — France — State aid C 18/10 (ex NN 20/10 and ex CP 294/08) — Currency support for aeronautic suppliers — Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the TFEU (1)

4

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
No. 60578.

Suit 4876.

#### C. J. Tower & Sons *v.*United States.

C. D. 1764 affirmed January 9, 1957. C. A. D. 634.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 62

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That (a) a revised edition of the brochure en3 titled ‘‘How Our Laws Are Made’’, under the direction of

4 the Parliamentarian of the House of Representatives in

5 consultation with the Parliamentarian of the Senate, shall

6 be printed as a Senate document, with suitable paper

7 cover in the style selected by the chairman of the Joint

8 Committee on Printing.

9 (b) There shall be printed—

10 (1)(A) 250,000 copies of the brochure for the

11 use of the House of Representatives, distributed in

12 equal numbers to each Member;

13 (B) 100,000 copies of the brochure for the use

14 of the Senate, distributed in equal numbers to each

15 Member;

16 (C) 2,000 copies of the brochure for the use of

17 the Joint Committee on Printing; and

18 (D) 1,400 copies of the brochure for distribu19 tion to the depository libraries; or
2

SCON 62 ES

1 (2) if the total printing and production costs of

2 copies in paragraph (1) exceed $180,000, such num3 ber of copies of the brochure as does not exceed total

4 printing and production costs of $180,000, with dis5 tribution to be allocated in the same proportion as

6 in paragraph (1).

Passed the Senate November 5, 1997.

Attest:

Secretary.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 62

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing printing of the brochure entitled ‘‘How

Our Laws Are Made’’.
Rel: June 7, 2024

STATE OF ALABAMA -- JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

THE SUPREME COURT

OCTOBER TERM, 2023-2024

SC-2023-0800

Charles A. Childers v. Clothiel Mallory, by and her through her guardian, 

Brent A. Mallory (Appeal from Blount Circuit Court: CV-21-900140).

SELLERS, Justice.

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(F), Ala. R. App. P.

Parker, C.J., and Wise, Stewart, and Cook, JJ., concur.