alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CHARLTON DEWAYNE 

LAURAMORE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D13-2173

_____________________________/

Opinion filed February 11, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County.

Thomas M. Jaworski, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Criminal Appeals Bureau 

Chief, and Jessica DaSilva, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MARSTILLER and RAY, JJ., and TERRELL, TERRY D., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, 

CONCUR.
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 23



                              ACCOUNTANT'S CONSENT



The Board of Directors
Cameron Financial Corporation


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-20563 and 333-20643) on Form S-8 of Cameron Financial Corporation of our
report dated November 21, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Cameron Financial Corporation and subsidiaries as of September 30, 1997 and
1996, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders' equity,
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended September
30, 1997, which report appears in the September 30, 1997 annual report on Form
10-K of Cameron Financial Corporation.

                                                        KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



Kansas City, Missouri
December 23, 1997
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 636

To amend title 10, United States Code, to restore the CHAMPUS eligibility

of certain members and former members of the uniformed services,

and their dependents, who are currently excluded from benefits under

CHAMPUS because of their entitlement to hospital insurance benefits

under medicare.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 26, 1993

Mr. SUNDQUIST introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to restore the

CHAMPUS eligibility of certain members and former

members of the uniformed services, and their dependents,

who are currently excluded from benefits under

CHAMPUS because of their entitlement to hospital insurance benefits under medicare.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 636 IH

1 SECTION 1. COMPLETE RESTORATION OF COVERAGE

2 UNDER CHAMPUS IN THE CASE OF RETIRED

3 MEMBERS AND CERTAIN DEPENDENTS WHO

4 ARE MEDICARE PARTICIPANTS.

5 (a) COMPLETE RESTORATION OF COVERAGE.—Sub6 section (d) of section 1086 of title 10, United States Code,

7 is amended to read as follows:

8 ‘‘(d)(1) A benefit may not be paid under a plan cov9 ered by this section in the case of a person enrolled in

10 any other insurance, medical service, or health plan or en11 titled to hospital insurance benefits under part A of title

12 XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c et seq.)

13 to the extent that the benefit under the plan covered by

14 this section is also a benefit under the other plan or medi15 care.

16 ‘‘(2) The prohibition contained in paragraph (1) shall

17 not apply in the case of a plan administered under title

18 XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).’’.

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—(1) Subsection (g)

20 of such section is amended by striking ‘‘Section 1079(j)

21 of this title shall apply to a plan contracted for under this

22 section, except that no person’’ and inserting ‘‘No per23 son’’.

24 (2) Section 1713(d) of title 38, United States Code,

25 is amended by striking out ‘‘section 1086(d)(1) of title 10

26 or’’.
3

•HR 636 IH

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

2 this section shall apply with respect to health care pro3 vided on and after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         June 20, 2018.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on June 14, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 447 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2018-177, CP2018-249.                

Elizabeth Reed,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2018-13183 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
$295 LASIK

CALL JOFFE FOR YOUR FREE LASIK EYE EXAM

and to See How You Qualify for $295 LASIK

|

e
J : 855-52-JOFFE JOFFE.COM @JoffeMediCenter

Joffe Louisville: 4902 Shelbyville Road Louisville, KY 40207

FOIA Confidential LCAV00012447


GET RID OF THE HASSLES

Y Best Price in Louisville & Guaranteed Financing

i i fanatt Schedul
We treat Nearsightedness, Farsightedness & Astigmatism see YOU:

FREE LASIK EXAM

The Best Technology, including All-Laser LASIK and find out how you
qualify for $295 LASIK

Plus, first 20 callers get $100 off LASIK vw

j 855-52-JOFFE JOFFE.COM @JoffeMediCenter
pili Joffe Louisville: 4902 Shelbyville Road Louisville, KY 40207

FOIA Confidential LCAV00012448
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          11,678
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              97
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                10,700
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     17,760
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        347,287
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 412,743
<DEPOSITS>                                     346,747
<SHORT-TERM>                                    13,150
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,274
<LONG-TERM>                                     13,753
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,162
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,057
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 412,743
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,867
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  282
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    69
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 8,218
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,330
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,661
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,557
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      106
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,504
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,298
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,298
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       984
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.90
<LOANS-NON>                                         26
<LOANS-PAST>                                       113
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,591
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       93
<RECOVERIES>                                        49
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,951
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,681
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,270
        

</TABLE>
261 La. 1045

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Philip H. CROTHERS, Jr.

No. 52447.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 1972.

In re: Philip H. Crothers, Jr. applying for writ of mandamus and stay order.

Writ refused. The showing made is insufficient to warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**
CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-102122 and 333-71608) and in therelated Prospectuses, and on Form S-8 pertaining to the 1989 Incentive Stock Planand the 1992 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-07707), the 1998 IncentiveStock Plan (No. 333-59633), the 2001 Nonstatutory Stock Plan and Employee StockPurchase Plan (No. 333-42644), the 2001 Director Option Plan (No. 333-63398),the Calydon, Inc. Management Incentive and Retention Plan, as amended (No. 333-71606), the 2001 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan and the 2002 Employee StockPurchase Plan (No. 333-91796), of Cell Genesys, Inc. of our report datedJanuary 21, 2003, with respectto the consolidated financial statements of Cell Genesys, Inc, includedin this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2002.

 

 

/s/ERNST & YOUNGLLP

Palo Alto, California                   March 28, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Registrants' Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
February 23, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-25-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-26-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-23-1997
<CASH>                                          11,345
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  185,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,621
<INVENTORY>                                    302,449
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               604,513
<PP&E>                                       1,031,805
<DEPRECIATION>                                 511,847
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,241,472
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          380,524
<BONDS>                                        223,392
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,479
<OTHER-SE>                                     502,603
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,241,472
<SALES>                                        745,012
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               745,012
<CGS>                                          571,151
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  571,151
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               131,716
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   818
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 34,680
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,045
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             20,635
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,635
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>
#### Adam MANUEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joseph E. ORTEGO, et ux., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 3808.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

April 19, 1972.

Preston N. Aucoin, Ville Platte, for plaintiff-appellant.

Dubuisson & Dubuisson by Jimmy L. Dauzat, and Leon Haas, Jr., Opelousas, for defendants-appellees.

Before FRUGÉ, HOOD and CULPEP-PER, JJ.

HOOD, Judge.

This is a workmen’s compensation suit instituted by Adam Manuel against Mr. and Mrs. Joseph E. Ortego. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the defendants, and plaintiff has appealed.

The trial judge found that “plaintiff has failed to prove that he suffered an accident while working for Joseph E. Ortego,” and he rendered judgment rejecting plaintiff’s demands. We have examined the record and have concluded that there is no error in the findings of or in the judgment rendered by the trial court.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed. The costs of this appeal are assessed to plaintiff-appellant.

Affirmed.
#### INGRAM CORPORATION v. James F. COOK.

No. 9334.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Feb. 1, 1973.

Sidney D. Fazio and Fred Kroenke, Jr., Baton Rouge, for appellant.

John L. Glover, Baton Rouge, for appel-lee.

Before LANDRY, SARTAIN and TUCKER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The Court, after considering the motion to dismiss this appeal as a suspensive one, has concluded from the record that in essence the mover has raised the question of the sufficiency of the bond to afford a sus-pensive appeal;

It is the opinion of this Court that the trial court retains jurisdiction to. consider the sufficiency of a suspensive appeal bond under the provision of Article 2088 of the Civil Code of Procedure;

And, therefore, we cannot entertain jurisdiction to determine the sufficiency of the amount of the bond in order for the appeal to qualify as a suspensive one.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied.
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 of Forlink Software Corporation, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Yi He,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, solely for purposes of Title
18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to my
knowledge:





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





(2)
            the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ Yi HeYi
      HeChief
      Executive OfficerDated:
      March 26, 2010
United States ofAmerica 


FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 


Washington, D.C. 20580 


Division of Advertising Practices 

October 16, 2017 

Peter C. Marinello 


Director 


Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program 


. 112 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor 


New York, NY 10016 


Re: 	 Advertising for Mayfair Industries Inc. 's Garcinia Cambogia ZT/Garcinia 

Cambogia Allure dietary supplement 

Dear Mr. Marinello: 

A few months ago, the Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program referred to the 

Federal Trade Commission an ERSP compliance investigation ofMayfair Industries Inc. 's 

claims that its Garcinia Cambogia ZT/Garcinia Cambogia Allure dietary supplement product is 

clinically proven to cause significant fat loss, including proven to "melt off 8 lbs of fat every 7 

days... and prevent your body from producing additional fat." Your referral indicated that 

Mayfair Industries did not respond to ERSP's inquiries or otherwise participate in ERSP's selfregulatory process. Accordingly, you referred this matter to the FTC for our review. 

After we alerted Mayfair Industries to the ERSP's referral to the FTC, the company 

agreed to cooperate with the ERSP' s inquiry. We understand from conversations with you and 

Jessica Grodzki that Mayfair Industries is actively cooperating with ERSP's inquiry. 

Accordingly, it appears no additional FTC action is warranted at this time. Our decision 

is not to be construed as a determination that a violation has not occurred. The Commission 

reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may require. The FTC fully 

supports the ERSP's self-regulatory process, and we sincerely appreciate your referral and the 

opportunity to continue to assist in supporting ERSP. 

Very truly yours, 

Devin W. Domond 

Chief of Staff for Advertising Practices
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 4.16

                           CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE


$150,000.00
Houston, Texas                                                      June 5, 2001


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, iExalt, Inc., a Nevada Corporation (Maker), promises to pay
to Don Ballard, 13902 Barryknoll, Houston, Texas 77079 (Holder) the principal
sum of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000.00) with interest from date
at the rate of 33,750 restricted shares to be issued, per month, plus 100,000
restricted shares if total amount of Promissory Note is delivered to iExalt,
Inc. prior to June 30, 2001. In addition to the above, Holder has the right to
convert all of the Principal and accrued interest to restricted common stock at
the rate of sixty-five percent (65%) of the closing price of the common stock
traded on the date of this Note. The total shares to be issued in full
satisfaction of this Promissory Note, may not exceed 1,500,000 shares. Principal
is payable in lawful money of the United States of America at 12000 Aerospace
Avenue, Suite 375, Houston, Texas 77034, or at such place as may later be
designated by written notice from the Holder to the Maker hereof, on the date
and in the manner following:

         All principal and accrued interest is due on or before six (6) months
         from the date of this note, or December 31, 2001.

         This Note is unsecured.

         Both parties understand that the amount or value above may exceed the
         maximum interest allowed by law, under the statutes of the state of
         Texas, and acknowledge that the terms are reasonable given the nature
         of the loan.

                                            iExalt, Inc.
                                            a Nevada corporation



                                            By: /s/Chris L. Sisk
                                                Chris L. Sisk
                                                Its Chief Financial Officer

Amount: $ 150,000 Received on: 2nd day of July, 2001


                                       36
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Lina Khan, Chair

Noah Joshua Phillips

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Christine S. Wilson

Alvaro M. Bedoya

RESOLUTION DIRECTING USE OF COMPULSORY PROCESS

IN NONPUBLIC INVESTIGATIONS OF PROPOSED MERGERS, ACQUISITIONS, AND

TRANSACTIONS

File No.

Nature and Scope of Investigation:

To determine whether any proposed merger, acquisition, or transaction, by any persons,

partnerships, corporations, or others, is in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §

18, as amended, or Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, as amended;

and to determine whether the requirements of Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18a, if

applicable, have been or will be fulfilled with respect to said transactions.

The Federal Trade Commission hereby resolves and directs that any and all compulsory

processes available to it be used in connection with these investigations for a period not to

exceed ten years. The expiration of this ten-year period shall not limit or terminate the

investigation or the legal effect of any compulsory process issued during the ten-year period.

The Federal Trade Commission specifically authorizes the filing or continuation of actions to

enforce any such compulsory process after the expiration of the ten-year period.

Authority to Conduct Investigation:

Sections 6, 9, 10, and 20 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 46, 49, 50,

and 57b-1, as amended; FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq., and

supplements thereto.

By direction of the Commission.

April J. Tabor

Secretary

Issued:

Expires:
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 4.9b

Indenture of Trust, Mortgage, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security
Agreement, dated as of May 8, 2001, between Danskammer OL LLC and The Chase
Manhattan Bank.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32

                            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 Quarterly Report of First Wilkow Venture (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc R. Wilkow,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Marc R. Wilkow

Marc R. Wilkow
Chief Executive Officer

DATED: May 13, 2005

                            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 Quarterly Report of First Wilkow Venture (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter Boelke,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Peter Boelke
-----------------------
Peter Boelke
Chief Financial Officer

DATED: May 13, 2005