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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE YEAR ENDED AUGUST
31, 2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH ANNUAL 10-K FILING DATED AUGUST 31, 2000. EPS AMOUNTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SFAS 128.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                       8,516,869
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,061,634
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,547,774
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            24,205,931
<PP&E>                                       6,742,952
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,633,031
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,631,044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       20,518,472
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        72,678
<OTHER-SE>                                  49,618,965
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,631,044
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           133,682,500
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              120,021,913
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               877,376
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,261,970
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             11,823,625
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,756,377
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          7,067,248
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,067,248
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2105

BELTRAN NYAMENJO NJOFANG,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A95-224-694)

Submitted: May 6, 2005 Decided: June 15, 2005

Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ignatius Udeani, UDEANI & ASSOCIATES, Ltd., Bloomington, Minnesota,

for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General,

James Hunolt, Senior Litigation Counsel, Uttam Dhillon, Associate

Deputy Attorney General, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED

STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

Njofang does not petition for review from that part of the

order that denied protection under the Convention Against Torture.

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Beltran Nyamenjo Njofang, a native and citizen of

Cameroon, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’

(Board) order denying him asylum, withholding of removal, and

protection under the Convention Against Torture.*

We will reverse the Board only if the evidence “‘was so

compelling that no reasonable fact finder could fail to find the

requisite fear of persecution.’” Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325

n.14 (4th Cir. 2002) (quoting INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478,

483-84 (1992)). We have reviewed the evidence of record, the

immigration judge’s decision, and the Board’s order and find

substantial evidence supports the conclusion that Njofang failed to

establish the past persecution or well-founded fear of future

persecution necessary to establish eligibility for asylum. See 8

C.F.R. § 1208.13(a) (2004) (stating that the burden of proof is on

the alien to establish eligibility for asylum); Elias-Zacarias, 502

U.S. at 483 (same).

Nor can Njofang show that he was entitled to withholding

of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) (2000). “Because the burden

of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even

though the facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who

is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding
- 3 -

of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft, 378

F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004).

Accordingly, we deny Njofang’s petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Christopher KENNER, Jr. v. CLERK OF COURT, 16TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. MARY, State of La., et al.

No. 61974.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 28, 1978.

In re: Christopher Kenner, Jr., applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of St. Mary.

Denied. Application was not filed in district court.
Exhibit 10.6

FORM OF AMENDMENT TO SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT SEVERANCE AGREEMENT

THIS AMENDMENT TO SEVERANCE AGREEMENT("Amendment"), dated effective as of August     , 2007 (the
"Effective Date"), is made by and between Forest Oil Corporation, a New York corporation (the "Company"),
and                        ("Executive").

WHEREAS, the Company and Executive have heretofore entered into that certain Severance Agreement
dated                        ,            ,
as amended (the "Severance Agreement"); and

WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Severance Agreement in certain respects;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises set forth above and the mutual agreements set forth herein, the Company and Executive
hereby agree, effective as of the Effective Date, that the Severance Agreement shall be amended as hereafter provided:

1.     Paragraph 1(c) of
the Severance Agreement shall be deleted and the following shall be substituted therefor:



---







2.     The
following new Paragraph 1(c)(1) shall be added immediately after Paragraph 1(c) of the Severance Agreement:



3.     The
following shall be added to the end of Paragraph 1(f) of the Severance Agreement:



4.     Clause (iii) of
Paragraph 3(b) of the Severance Agreement shall be deleted and the following shall be substituted therefor:



5.     Clause (i) of
Paragraph 3(d) of the Severance Agreement shall be deleted and the following shall be substituted therefor:



6.     The
following shall be added immediately after the word "due" in Paragraph 4 of the Severance Agreement:



7.     The
following shall be added immediately after the first sentence of Paragraph 5(a) of the Severance Agreement:



2

---





8.     The
following shall be added to the end of Paragraph 6(b) of the Severance Agreement:



9.     The
heading of Paragraph 6(i) of the Severance Agreement shall be changed to "Release and Delayed Payment Restriction", the current text of
Paragraph 6(i) of the Severance Agreement shall be redesignated as subparagraph (1) of Paragraph 6(i) and the following new subparagraph (2) shall be added to
the end of Paragraph 6(i) of the Severance Agreement:



10.   This
Amendment (a) shall supersede any prior agreement between the Company and Executive relating to the subject matter of this Amendment and (b) shall be
binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and any successors to the Company and all persons lawfully claiming under Executive.

11.   As
amended hereby, the Severance Agreement is specifically ratified and reaffirmed.

3

---



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed and delivered this Amendment as of the            day
of                        , 2007,
effective as of the Effective Date.

| |  | FOREST OIL CORPORATION
| |  | ----------------------
| |  | By:                   
| |  |                       
| |  |                       
| |  | EXECUTIVE             

4

---



QuickLinks
No. 72-1089.

#### London *v.*Patterson, Vocational Institution Superintendent.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000935499
<NAME>                        SPENCER'S RESTAURANTS, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-26-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-26-2000
<CASH>                             347,507
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                       24,500
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                         47,862
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   449,028
<PP&E>                           2,295,948
<DEPRECIATION>                     274,492
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   2,503,004
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            1,493,190
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                         31,507
<COMMON>                            51,003
<OTHER-SE>                      21,011,671
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     2,503,004
<SALES>                          2,645,770
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 2,554,850
<CGS>                            2,297,242
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    3,653,905
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 (19,942)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (959,373)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (1,099,055)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    139,682
<CHANGES>                         (691,222)
<NET-INCOME>                    (1,650,595)
<EPS-BASIC>                        (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (0.05)


</TABLE>
#### Allen J. WEBER v. Mr. & Mrs. Calvin C. McMILLAN.

No. 54279.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 25, 1974.

In re: Allen J. Weber applying for cer-tiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of St. Charles. 285 So.2d 349.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 3/24/2023 | Document No. 607303 | PAGE Page 1 of 1 * PUBLIC *; 

__________________________________________ 

PUBLIC 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

) 

__________________________________________) 

In the Matter of 

Microsoft Corp., 

 a corporation, and 

Activision Blizzard, Inc., 

 a corporation, 

Respondents. 

) 

) 

)

) 

) Docket No. 9412 

)

) 

) 

) 

ORDER GRANTING SECOND AGREED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

On March 23, 2023, non-party Cornerstone Research filed a second motion to extend the 

time for it to file a motion to quash or limit a subpoena served on Cornerstone Research by 

Respondent Activision Blizzard, Inc. (“Activision”) (“Motion”). Cornerstone Research states 

that Activision and Cornerstone Research are engaged in ongoing negotiations as to the scope of 

the requested document production and that further negotiations may narrow or eliminate areas 

of dispute. Cornerstone Research further states that Activision agrees to the extension requested 

in the Motion. 

Upon review and consideration of the Motion, the Motion is GRANTED. It is hereby 

ORDERED that Cornerstone Research’s deadline to file a motion to quash or limit Activision’s 

subpoena is extended to March 30, 2023. 

ORDERED: 

D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Date: March 24, 2023
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Evans BROWN.

No. 60626.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 16, 1977.

In re: Evans Brown, applying for remedial writs.

Writ not considered. Applicant must first apply for the relief sought in the District Court.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7819 

To provide that CARES Act Provider Relief Fund payments are not includible 

in gross income, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2020 

Mrs. AXNE (for herself and Mr. DUNN) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide that CARES Act Provider Relief Fund payments 

are not includible in gross income, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Eliminating the Pro5 vider Relief Fund Tax Penalties Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CARES ACT PROVIDER RELIEF FUND PAYMENTS EX7 CLUDED FROM GROSS INCOME. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of the Internal Rev9 enue Code of 1986, any CARES Act Provider Relief Fund 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7819 IH

1 payment shall not be included in the gross income of the 

2 recipient of such payment. 

3 (b) CLARIFICATION OF TREATMENT OF CERTAIN EX4 PENSES.—For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 

5 1986 and notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 

6 deduction and the basis of any property shall be deter7 mined without regard to whether any amount is excluded 

8 from gross income under subsection (a). 

9 (c) CARES ACT PROVIDER RELIEF FUND PAY10 MENT.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘CARES 

11 Act Provider Relief Fund payment’’ means any grant or 

12 similar assistance provided by the Secretary of Health and 

13 Human Services under the CARES Act Provider Relief 

14 Fund program (including any amounts made available to 

15 carry out such program by the Paycheck Protection Pro16 gram and Health Care Enhancement Act or any other pro17 vision of law enacted after the date of the enactment of 

18 such Act). 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Charles Cecil MATHIS alias Charles Holcomb alias Charles C. Hawkins, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1878.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 29, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit
31.2.1
 
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 I, Warren
R. Nelson, certify that:
 
 1.  I have
reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A of Shells
Seafood Restaurants, Inc.;
 
 2.  Based on
my knowledge, this annual 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 annual 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 we 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 us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;
 
 (b)  evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this
annual 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 fourth fiscal quarter 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 certifying 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 the 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
 
 (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 2,
2005
 /s/
WARREN R. NELSON
 Warren R.
Nelson
 Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
PUBLIC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

__________________________________________

)

In the Matter of ) 

)

HomeAdvisor, Inc., a corporation, )

 d/b/a Angi Leads, ) Docket No. 9407

 d/b/a HomeAdvisor Powered By Angi, )

)

Respondent. )

__________________________________________)

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO 

EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE FACT DISCOVERY

On September 6, 2022, Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) Complaint Counsel and 

HomeAdvisor, Inc. (“HomeAdvisor”) filed a Joint Motion to Extend the Time to Complete Fact 

Discovery (“Joint Motion”). The parties jointly request a two-week extension to the September 

6, 2022 deadline to complete fact discovery, “solely for purposes of completing the deposition of 

HomeAdvisor.” Joint Motion at 2. 

Pursuant to Rule 3.21(c)(2), the Administrative Law Judge may grant a motion to extend 

any deadline or time specified in the Scheduling Order, other than the date of the evidentiary 

hearing, upon a showing of good cause. 16 C.F.R. § 3.21(c)(2). In determining whether to grant 

the motion, the Administrative Law Judge shall consider, inter alia, any extensions already 

granted, and the need to conclude the evidentiary hearing and render an initial decision in a 

timely manner. Id. Based on the representations in the Joint Motion, the parties have 

demonstrated good cause for the requested extension. Moreover, this is the parties’ first request 

to extend a Scheduling Order deadline, and the requested extension will not adversely impact the 

ability to conclude the evidentiary hearing or to render an initial decision in a timely manner. 

Accordingly, the Joint Motion is GRANTED, and it is hereby ORDERED that the close 

of fact discovery is extended to September 20, 2022, solely for the purposes of allowing the 

completion of the deposition of HomeAdvisor. 

ORDERED:

D. Michael Chappell

Chief Administrative Law Judge

Date: September 7, 2022

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 9/7/2022 | DOCUMENT NO. 605530 | Page 1 of 1 | PUBLIC
#### CITY OF MIAMI BEACH et al., Appellants, v. Milton ROBBINS, Appellee.

No. 70-676.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 2, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 31(a)

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (15 U.S.C. § 7241)

I, Pierre-Olivier Beckers, certify that:

1) I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Delhaize America, 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
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 us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this 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 certifying 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 the 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 control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: May 16, 2006



/s/ Pierre-Olivier Beckers

|                       
|-----------------------
|Pierre-Olivier Beckers 
|Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 Dynamic Leisure Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas
W. Busch, 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(a) 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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Thomas W. Busch
-------------------
Thomas W. Busch
Chief Financial Officer
March 31, 2006