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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-29-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-27-1998
<CASH>                                       5,193,280
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               31,373,741
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,117,695
<INVENTORY>                                 37,424,537
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            85,623,583
<PP&E>                                      15,056,316
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             131,477,988
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,837,588
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,231
<OTHER-SE>                                  94,339,808
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               131,477,988
<SALES>                                     45,516,985
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            45,516,985
<CGS>                                       26,988,188
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               26,988,188
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,719,489
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               167,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             517,198
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                924,873
<INCOME-TAX>                                   332,954
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            635,712
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   635,712
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
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 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

PATRICK DRUM,

Plaintiff,

v.

HAROLD CLARKE,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5360 RBL/KLS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Karen L.

Strombom, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the remaining record, does

hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) Plaintiff’s Motions for Class Action Certification (Dkt. # 77 and 86) are DENIED;

and 

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, counsel for Defendant

and to the Hon. Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 1st day of May, 2007.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05360-RBL Document 116 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 1
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS N O . P D - 0413- 07
S AF ET Y NAT I ONAL CAS UAL TY CORP . , AGEN T M ANUE L L EY VA

D / B/ A R O C K Y BA I L B O N D S , A ppe l l ant

v . THE S TA TE OF TE X AS ON APP ELLANT’ S ’ S PET I TI ON FOR DI S CRETI ON ARY REVI EW

FROM THE EI GH TH CO URT O F AP PEALS

EL P ASO CO UNTY C OC HRAN , J . , fi l ed a c oncurr i ng opi ni on. O P I N I O N T h e St at e di s cus s es s ever al val i d r eas ons w hyA r t i cl e 22. 13, deal i ng w i t h t he
exoner at i on of a ba i l bond, m aybe a c ount erpr oduct i ve s t atut e thatt i es t he hands of j udges and thw ar t s t he purpos e of ha vi ng a s ur etyi n t he fi r s tpl ace . N onethel es s , I agr ee w i t h t he
m aj or i tythatt hes e def

i ci t s do notr is e t o t he l evel of an unc ons t i tut i onal vi ol at i on of the
se p a ra tio n -o f

-p o w e rs d o c trin e . T h e se a re m a tters th a t ar e b e st lef t to th e L e g isla tu re a n d toSafety National Casualty

Corp. ConcurringOpinion Page2

Majority Op. at 13. 1 l ocal gov ern m ent s t hatm ayi ncr eas e thei rr el i ance upon non- pr ofi tPr etr i al Ser vi ces pr ogr ams. T he maj or i t yapt l y n o t es , “B ai l bondi ng i s a bus i nes s [. ] ” I ndeed i ti s . T o t he 1 ext ent that t he i nt er es t s of t he bai l bond bus i nes s and t he needs of t he cr i m i nal j us t i ce s y s t em a re n o t o n th e sa m e tra c k , loc a l an d sta te g o v e r n m e n ts a re f re e to m a k e a p p ro p ria te
a d ju s tm e n ts. C o u rts d o n o t d e c id e th e w isd o m o f su c h law s, th e yd e c id e o n lyth e ir
c o n s t i tu t i o n a l i t y. I t her efor e j oi n t he maj or i t yopi ni on.
Fi l ed: M ay14, 2008 P ub l i sh
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 11, 2015*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**L.124 Government-Sponsored Enterprises GSEs 1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 69348.

#### Aristo Craft Distinctive Miniatures and Lansen Naeve Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/3552(B), etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of miniature motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 66961, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Case No. 14,862.

#### UNITED STATES v. COOPER.

[Hoff. Land Cas. 101.] 1

District Court, N. D. California.

Dec. Term, 1855.

Mexican LANif Cxkant— Validitt op Claim —Location.

No objections made to the confirmation of this claim.

Claim [by John B. R.- Cooper] for four leagues of land in Sonoma county [the Rancho El Molino], confirmed by the board, and appealed by the United States.

S. W. Inge, U. S. Atty.

Halleck, Peachy & Billings, for appellee.

1

 [Reported by Nuniit Hubert, Esq., and here reprinted by permission.]

HOFFMAN, District Judge.

The claimant in this case, a naturalized Mexican citizen, obtained in December, 1833, a grant from the governor for the place called Rio Ojotska.’ This grant was approved by the departmental assembly,-and a certificate of its confirmation delivered to the grantee, as appears from the testimony, and the expediente filed in this case. He subsequently applied to the governor for an exchange of the land granted for that now claimed by him. Proceedings on this application were commenced by Governor 1 Figueroa, and the new grant was made, as desired by the petitioner, by Governor Gutierrez on the twenty-fourth of February, 1836. These facts are proved by the testimony of Hartnell and Vallejo, whose evidence is corroborated by the expediente on file in the archives. The genuineness of the grants is fully established. Previously to obtaining the last grant, the claimant had gone into possession of the tract solicited, and had built a house upon it. He also had. as early as 1834. placed a considerable number of cattle upon it, and had commenced the erection of a mill, upon which he expended more than $10,000. He also erected a blacksmith shop, and for two years had employed upon his rancho men to the average number of sixteen, and sometimes thirty or forty Indians. It is clear that the grantee fulfilled the conditions and carried out the objects of the colonization laws to an extent very unusual in the then condition of the country.

With regard to the locution of the land, it appears from the testimony of O’Farrell and other witnesses, who are acquainted with the adjacent country, that there is no difficulty in ascertaining its locality by means of the diseño which accompanies the grant. O’Farrell, who had long been a surveyor under the Mexicans, testifies that he has, by means of the grant and the diseño, made a survey of the land, and that it contains, as surveyed by him, only the quantity specified in the grant.

*627This claim was held to be valid by the board. No objections to it are suggested on the part of the United States, and we are of opinion that the decision -of the board should be affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER,****PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**     I, Frank A. Katarow, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Medwave, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: August 14, 2007         By:                                     /s/ Frank A. Katarow    Frank A. Katarow    Chief Executive Officer (Interim)
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. 

SIGI GBADEBO,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 05-612-M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offense charged: False Statement in Application for Passport, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1542.

Date of Detention Hearing: December 21, 2005

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.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) The Pretrial Services Report of December 21, 2005, reveals that defendant is a

native and citizen of Nigeria and that he has substantial family ties residing in Nigeria and Uganda.

(2) Defendant’s family moved back to Nigeria once this investigation began.

(3) The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has filed a detainer against

the defendant.

Case 2:05-mj-00612-JPD Document 6 Filed 12/21/05 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

(4) The defendant has relatively minimal ties to this community. 

(5) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions that will reasonably

assure the defendant’s appearance at future Court hearings.

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 21st day of December, 2005.

s/ James P. Donohue 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:05-mj-00612-JPD Document 6 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 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

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

NEIL GRENNING,

Plaintiff,

v.

EILEEN W. BISSON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5298RJB

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1), does

hereby find and ORDER. 

(1) Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security

therefor. Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below,

an initial partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the

filing fee is satisfied.

(2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma

pauperis, the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial

filing fee equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the

average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date

of this Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

Case 3:06-cv-05298-RJB Document 8 Filed 07/20/06 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

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($350.00) for this matter has been paid.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy

of this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgment and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager) at the Washington State

Department of Corrections.

DATED this 20th day of July, 2006.

 /s/ J. Kelley Arnold____________ J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05298-RJB Document 8 Filed 07/20/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10.18

Summary of Executive Officer and Director Compensation Arrangements

Executive Officer
Compensation

The following table presents the 2006 base salary and 2006 bonus plan approved by the Board of Directors pursuant to the
annual incentive compensation plan for the President and Chief Executive Officer and four of the five other most highly compensated executive officers for 2005. The other most highly compensated executive officer terminated his employment with
Hercules in September 2005. Under the 2006 bonus plan, bonuses are paid to Hercules executive officers based on performance measures established jointly by the Nominating, Governance and Compensation Committee and management. For 2006, the
annual incentive bonuses are based on targets for Hercules earnings, return on the use of capital, and company safety statistics. The Committee has established three performance measurement levels: threshold level, target level and maximum or
stretch level. The amount of incentive compensation increases with each increasing level of Hercules performance.



|                   |  |                  |            |            |   |            |  |   |           
|------------------ |  | ---------------- | ---------- | ---------- | - | ---------- |  | - | ----------
|                   |  |                  |            | 2006 Bonus
|Officer            |  | 2006 Base Salary |            | Target     |   | Maximum   
|Randall D. Stilley |  | $                | 300,000.00 |            | $ | 200,000.00 |  | $ | 400,000.00
|Steven A. Manz     |  | $                | 180,000.00 |            | $ | 120,000.00 |  | $ | 240,000.00
|Don P. Rodney      |  | $                | 150,000.00 |            | $ | 45,000.00  |  | $ | 90,000.00 
|Randy Reed         |  | $                | 170,000.00 |            | $ | 85,000.00  |  | $ | 170,000.00
|Thomas E. Hord     |  | $                | 225,000.00 |            | $ | 90,000.00  |  | $ | 180,000.00

Director Fees

Directors who are also full-time officers or employees of Hercules do not receive additional compensation for serving as directors. All other directors receive an annual retainer of $30,000. Each non-employee director
also receives a fee of $1,500 for each board meeting and each committee meeting attended. In addition, the chairman of the audit committee receives an annual fee of $15,000 and the chairman of the nominating, governance and compensation committee
receives an annual fee of $8,000. Hercules also reimburses the reasonable expenses incurred by the directors in attending meetings and Company business.Each non-employee director also receives an annual grant of restricted stock under
Hercules 2004 long-term incentive plan having a fair market value (as defined in the plan) of $40,000, which vests on the business day after the following years annual meeting of stockholders. Any fees payable to directors who are
affiliated with LR Hercules Holdings, LP (Lime Rock) or Greenhill Capital Partners, L.P. (Greenhill) will be paid to Lime Rock and Greenhill, as applicable.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sepracor Inc. (the “Company”)for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, TimothyJ. Barberich, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1)   the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

| Date:  August 9, 2005 | * *                                      |
|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                       | /s/* *TIMOTHY J.  BARBERICH              |
|                       | Timothy J. Barberich*Chief Executive Officer* |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Sepracor Inc. and will beretained by Sepracor Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

----
Order entered November 4, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-01113-CV

GERALD W. HADDOCK, Appellant

V.

G. MICHAEL GRUBER; BRIAN N. HAIL; MICHAEL J. LANG; RICHARD M. HULL, 

JR., AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF RICHARD M. HULL, 

DECEASED; GODWIN GRUBER, LLP; GODWIN PAPAS LANGLEY RONQUILLO, 

LLP; GRUBER HURST JOHANSEN HAIL & SHANK, LLP, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-09161

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s November 2, 2016 unopposed motion to extend time to 

file brief. We GRANT the motion, ORDER appellant to file his brief on or before January 6, 

2017, and ORDER appellees to file their brief(s) on or before March 5, 2017. 

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-26-2000
<CASH>                                       8,679,821
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               47,227,439
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,807,868
<INVENTORY>                                 45,242,550
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           110,271,458
<PP&E>                                      24,598,148
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             166,420,389
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       42,960,548
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,686
<OTHER-SE>                                 104,028,008
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               166,420,389
<SALES>                                     67,756,524
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            67,756,524
<CGS>                                       40,179,619
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               40,179,619
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            25,227,237
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               156,924
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             756,892
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,671,457
<INCOME-TAX>                                   908,295
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,712,131
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,712,131
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .12


</TABLE>