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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          25,201                   1,558
<SECURITIES>                                    46,231                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,808                   1,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (642)                   (249)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                76,435                   4,316
<PP&E>                                           2,576                   1,165
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,196)                   (399)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  77,815                   5,082
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,323                   3,288
<BONDS>                                            546                     327
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                  10,489
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            18                       2
<OTHER-SE>                                      68,928                 (9,025)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    77,815                   5,082
<SALES>                                         12,765                   4,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,765                   4,967
<CGS>                                            1,300                     267
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,300                     267
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,689                   8,534
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (830)                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,394)                 (3,834)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,394)                 (3,834)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.31)                  (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 3.9

                               SPECIAL RESOLUTION

The following special resolution was passed by the undermentioned Company on
the date stated:

NAME OF COMPANY:         SIDEWARE SYSTEMS INC.

DATE RESOLUTION PASSED:  JUNE 28, 2000

RESOLUTION:

IT WAS RESOLVED, as a special resolution, that the articles of the Company be
amended

(1)  by deleting the existing paragraph 10.3 and substituting therefor the
     following:

     10.3

          (a)  if at the time of a general meeting any shares of the company
               are listed on the Nasdaq National Market or SmallCap Market, a
               quorum for that meeting shall be members, or proxyholders
               representing members, holding not less than one-third of the
               issued shares entitled to be voted at the meeting, and

          (b)  if at the time of a general meeting no shares of the company
               are so listed, a quorum for that meeting shall be members, or
               proxyholders representing members, holding not less than
               one-twentieth of the issued shares entitled to be voted at the
               meeting.

          The foregoing requirements are subject to any order of a court of
          competent jurisdiction to the contrary.

          The directors, the Secretary or, in his absence, an Assistant
          Secretary, and the solicitor of the company shall be entitled to
          attend at any general meeting but no such person shall be counted in
          the quorum or be entitled to vote at any general meeting unless he
          is a member or proxyholder or is otherwise entitled to vote thereat.
<PAGE>

(2)  by deleting article 10.4 in its entirety and renumbering articles 10.5
     to 10.15 accordingly.

Certified a true copy the 28th day of June, 2000.

                                       (Signature) /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
                                                   ---------------------------

                                       (Relationship to Company) Solicitor
Exhibit 23.1  Consent of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


                         Consent of Independent Auditors


The Board of Directors
Avant! Corporation:

We consent to  incorporation  by reference in the  Registration  Statement  (No.
333-18445)  on Form  S-3 and in the  Registration  Statements  (Nos.  333-16981,
333-16303,  333-15159,  333-06405,  33-77196 and 33-77242) on Form S-8 of Avant!
Corporation  of our  report  dated  January  22,  1997,  except as to the second
paragraph of note 11 which is as of March 18, 1997, relating to the consolidated
balance  sheets of Avant!  Corporation as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and the
related consolidated statements of income,  shareholders' equity, and cash flows
for each of the years in the three-year  period ended December 31, 1996, and the
related consolidated financial statement schedule,  which report appears in this
December 31, 1996 annual report on Form 10-K of Avant! Corporation.

                                                       /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

San Jose, California
March 28, 1997

                                       48
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 176 (Thursday, September 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24073]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. MG97-15-001]


Kern River Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Filing

September 5, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 2, 1997, Kern River Gas Transmission 
Company (Kern River) filed revised standards of conduct in response to 
the Commission's August 6, 1997, Order on Standards of Conduct. 80 FERC 
para. 61,209 (1997).
    Kern River states that it served a copy of the filing to all 
parties on the service list in this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 or 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 or 18 CFR 385.214. All such 
motions to intervene or protest should be filed on or before September 
22, 1997. 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 proceeding. 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.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-24073 Filed 9-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Eugene N. COOKMEYER v. Jo Ann Karl COOKMEYER.

No. 4199.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

Dec. 7, 1970.

On Application for Rehearing Dec. 29, 1970.

Leonard A. Calcagno, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.

Walter F. Gemeinhardt, New Orleans, for defendant-appellee.

Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and Le-SUEUR, JJ.

REDMANN, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from- a judgment dismissing his suit for separation from bed and board and claim for alimony pendente lite, and granting a separation and, in effect, alimony on his wife’s reconventional demand.

Oral argument on the merits was had, from which it appeared to us that the judgment appealed from would have to be affirmed; but we find that we cannot consider that question.

On inspection of the record we find that the appeal must be dismissed because the appeal bond was not timely filed and we accordingly have no jurisdiction. We are obliged on our own motion to notice lack of jurisdiction; Orrell' v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., 248 La. 576, 180 So.2d 710 (1965).

Notice of the December 17, 1969 judgment was mailed to counsel on December 18, thus allowing Friday the 19th and Monday and Tuesday the 22d and 23d as the delay for applying for a new trial, C.C.P. art. 1974. C.C.P. art. 2087(1) fix*79es the beginning of the delay for taking an appeal at “the expiration of the delay for applying for a new trial * * * ” where no application is timely filed. An appeal from a judgment granting a separation “can be taken only within thirty days”, C.C.P. art. 3942, “from the applicable date provided in Article 2087(l)-(3).” The same is true as to alimony judgments, art. 3943. Thus the appeal from the judgment here had to be taken within 30 days of December 23, 1969, or not later than Thursday, January 22, 1970. The bond specified in the order of appeal was not filed until January 23, and we therefore have no power to review that judgment now but must dismiss the appeal; Pennison v. Pen-nison, 157 So.2d 628 (La.App. 1963), writ refused 245 La. 585, 159 So.2d 290; Brown v. Brown, 180 So.2d 106 (La.App.1965); Bowden v. Bowden, 203 So.2d 879 (La.App. 1967), Manderfield v. Manderfield, 221 So. 2d 898 (La.App. 1969). See also Schneider v. Manion, 217 La. 118, 46 So.2d 58 (1950); but note that holidays are no longer excluded in the computation of the delay, C.C.P. art. 5059.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

On application for rehearing, plaintiff appellant asserts the record is in error in showing the appeal bond was filed on January 23, 1970, and that the bond was in fact filed timely on January 22, 1970.

Plaintiff may seek to correct this alleged error by stipulation or by appropriate proceeding in the trial court; C.C.P. art. 2132. See also art. 2088, subd. (4).

We will pretermit action on plaintiff’s application for rehearing until January 29, 1971, until which time plaintiff may seek to have the record corrected.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of catalogingand locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site.(Historical purposes)

**Title:** Full-time employees in law enforcementagencies, 1997-2016
 
FullReport; DataTables

 
 
**SuDoc****Number: J  29.2:EM 7/2  
**Item Number: 0717-R-01 (online) 
CGP system Number:001079369
 ****
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6767

HERMAN L. DOBSON, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:05-hc-00787-BO) Submitted: August 31, 2006 Decided: September 8, 2006 Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herman L. Dobson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Herman Dobson, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Dobson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and di smiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Order entered October 30, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01316-CV

IN RE BRIAN D. MARTEL, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 470th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-52347-2015

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Bridges and Justice Stoddart

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY the petition for writ of mandamus. 

We DENY as moot relator’s Emergency Motion for Stay of Discovery Deadline. We ORDER

relator to bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
1 The Honorable William G. Cambridge, United States District Judge for the

District of Nebraska, now retired.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 00-2038

___________ Pat Hall, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Hormel Foods, Corp., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 4, 2001 Filed: April 9, 2001

___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Pat Hall appeals from the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his action brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans withDisabilities Act, the Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act, and the Nebraska Act Prohibiting Unjust Discrimination in Employment Because of Age. Upon our de novo review, see Widoe v. Dist. #111 Otoe County Sch. , 147 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir.-2-

1998), we conclude the district court’s judgment was proper for the reasons stated in its thorough opinion. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 5 ,

2022
.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 20

- 00531

- CV

THE CWEREN LAW FIRM, PLLC , Appellant

V.
SALEM SOLOMON , Appellee
On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No
. 4

Harri s County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1141556

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment signed June 26, 202 0 . On March 29, 2022, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appea l

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1 (a)(1) . The motion is granted.
We dismiss the appeal

. P ER CURIAM
Panel c onsists of Justices Wise, Spain, and Hassan.
Exhibit 31.1

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF MARTIN NIELSON AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Martin Nielson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2006 of Pacific Magtron International Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
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 me by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly 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 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 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 controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

<PAGE>

      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 15, 2006


By: /s/ Martin Nielson
-----------------------
Martin Nielson
Chief Executive Officer
Case 05-28642-TPA Doc 75 Filed 01/03/06 Entered 01/03/06 17:05:18 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 4
Case 05-28642-TPA Doc 75 Filed 01/03/06 Entered 01/03/06 17:05:18 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 4
Case 05-28642-TPA Doc 75 Filed 01/03/06 Entered 01/03/06 17:05:18 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 4
Case 05-28642-TPA Doc 75 Filed 01/03/06 Entered 01/03/06 17:05:18 Desc Main

Document Page 4 of 4
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Collective Bargaining: Radio, Television, and Electronics Industry

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics					,	Gary, William S.					 and 	Kittner, Dorothy Ruth. 						*Collective Bargaining: Radio, Television, and Electronics Industry : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1089*,												Washington: 								U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 										1952,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4436,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001077059
<NAME> USANI LLC

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<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>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                        758,832
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               758,832
<CGS>                                          394,298
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  394,298
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               264,765
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 96,752
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,951
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             88,783
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    88,783
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

SIAN OCEAN RESIDENCES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a

Florida non

- profit corporation

,

Appellant,

v.

BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS CWALT, INC. ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2006

- OA19, MORTGAGE PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006

- OA19 , Appellee

.

No. 4D 14

- 4687

[ May 4 , 2016 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Thomas M. Lynch , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE13

- 20761 (05)

.

Ra lph C. Ruocco of Glazer & Associates, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Brian K. Hole and Katherine M. Joffe of Holland & Knight LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed. See Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.

, 143 So. 3d 954 ( Fla. 4th DCA 2014).

C IKLIN
, C.J., T

AYLOR and M AY
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.