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

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          26,900
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                53,800
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     75,874
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          21,430
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            21,528
<LOANS>                                        320,940<F1>
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,882
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 520,586
<DEPOSITS>                                     419,157
<SHORT-TERM>                                    36,273
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,748
<LONG-TERM>                                      9,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            52
<OTHER-SE>                                      48,356
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 520,586
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 29,471
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,481
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   951
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                35,903
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              15,210
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,689
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           18,214
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    3,097
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   3
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 19,054
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     14
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          14
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    570
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       336
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.98
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,270
<LOANS-PAST>                                       846
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   179
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 5,263
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,674
<RECOVERIES>                                       196
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,882
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,882
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
<FN>
<F1>Net of allowance for loan losses of $5,882.
</FN>


</TABLE>
# C_2023134EN.01000901.xml

| 17.4.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 February 2023 — RH v Commission

(Case T-175/21) (1)

(Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance - Financial Regulation - Investigation by OLAF - Commission decision imposing an administrative penalty - Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures funded by the general budget of the European Union and by the EDF - Entry on the database of the early detection and exclusion system - Grave professional misconduct - Manifest error of assessment - Non-contractual liability - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)

(2023/C 134/11)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: RH (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà, P. Rossi and R. Pethke, Agents)

Re:

By its action, the applicant seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 18 February 2021 excluding it from participating in award procedures for public procurement and grants governed by the EU budget and by the 11th European Development Fund or from being selected for implementing EU funds under Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 and for implementing funds under the European Development Fund governed by Regulation (EU) 2018/1877 and, secondly, on the basis of Article 268 TFEU, compensation for the damage which it allegedly suffered as a result.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 18 February 2021 excluding RH from participating in award procedures for public procurement and grants governed by the EU budget and by the 11th European Development Fund or from being selected for implementing EU funds under Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 and for implementing funds under the European Development Fund governed by Regulation (EU) 2018/1877; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 18 February 2021 excluding RH from participating in award procedures for public procurement and grants governed by the EU budget and by the 11th European Development Fund or from being selected for implementing EU funds under Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 and for implementing funds under the European Development Fund governed by Regulation (EU) 2018/1877;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 206, 31.5.2021.

---
#### STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Robert W. ELLERSON, Executor of the Estate of Lillian V. Everhart, deceased, and Ethel Eleanor Olsen, and Alert Bumper & Body Supply, Inc., and Aetna Life & Casualty Company, Appellees.

No. 71-342.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 17, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Donnie Fay JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-253.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 24, 1970.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Palm Beach County; Russell H. McIntosh, Judge.

Appeal quashed.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of GlycoGenesys, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:



|(1) |  | the Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2003 (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 results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods
presented in the Report.
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 19, 2003



|By:    |  | /s/ John W. Burns  |  |  |  | By:    |  | /s/ Bradley J Carver
|------ |  | ------------------ |  |  |  | ------ |  | --------------------
|Name:  |  | John W. Burns      |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Bradley J Carver    
|Title: |  | SVP, CFO Secretary |  |  |  | Title: |  | CEO President       



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
GlycoGenesys, Inc. and will be retained by GlycoGenesys, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



24
#### Doc E. KIRBY, Petitioner, Cross-Respondent, v. VOLUSIA COUNTY DISTRICT #1 et al., Respondents, Cross-Petitioners.

No. 39916.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 5, 1970.

Certiorari denied.

ERVIN, C. J., and DREW, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-10241

Summary Calendar

Thomas Sawyer, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Caryn Die; Tammy Messimer; Daniel A. Lakin; Ruben 

Sapin; Marcia Odal; Pepper Bradberry, 

Defendants—Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:15-CV-92

Before Smith, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Thomas Sawyer, Texas prisoner # 579557, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

complaint alleging that the defendants used excessive force and were 

deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. He now appeals and 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 8, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-10241 Document: 00516084886 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/08/2021
No. 21-10241

2

moves to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). The appellees move to dismiss 

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

We have jurisdiction over final decisions and other decisions covered 

by the collateral order doctrine. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292; Mohawk Indus., 

Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 103, 106, 116 (2009); Askanase v. Livingwell, 

Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10 (5th Cir. 1993). In this case, no final judgment has 

been entered and there are no immediately appealable orders. Accordingly, 

we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. 

The appellees’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is 

GRANTED. Sawyer’s motion to proceed IFP is DENIED. The appeal is 

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 

Case: 21-10241 Document: 00516084886 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/08/2021
---

EXHIBIT 13.2

|CERTIFICATION                                                             
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|of                                                                        
|Periodic Financial Report                                                 
|Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, 18 U.S.C.
|Section 1350                                                              

I, P. Wayne Musselman, a Director of Sand Technology Inc. (the
Company) performing functions similar to those of a principal financial
officer, hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the Fiscal
Year ended July 31, 2012 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended and that the
information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 29, 2013

|By: | /s/ P. WAYNE MUSSELMAN | 
|--- | ---------------------- | 
|    | P. Wayne Musselman     | 
|    | Director               | 

This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for
any other purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Annual Report or as a
separate disclosure document.

---
Exhibit 11 – Statement regarding computation of per share earnings

 
The following table reconciles  the income and average share amounts used to compute both basic and diluted earnings per  share:

2002
2001
2000
Net income    (loss)
$ 213,576
$ (10,296)
$ 23,944 
Basic    earnings per share:
Weighted    average    shares outstanding
    5,083,146
    5,083,146
    5,056,064 Diluted earnings per share:Weighted average    shares outstanding
5,083,146
5,083,146
5,056,064Shares contingently    exercisable from    stock options
535,000
*
580,000Weighted average    shares outstanding
5,618,146
5,083,146
5,636,064
* Certain stock options were excluded from the computation of earnings    per share due to their antidilutive effect. The number of such options is $515,000 for    2001.
Opinion issued April 14, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-16-00047-CV

———————————

IN RE MAROPCO, INC., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, MarOpCo, Inc., has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus 

challenging an “Amended Protective Order,” an “Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion 

for Expedited Discovery,” and oral rulings and findings.

1

 

1 The underlying case is Preston Marshall, Individually and Rusk Capital 

Management, L.L.C. v. MarOpCo, Inc., cause no. 2015-35950, in the 11th District 

Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Mike D. Miller, presiding.
2

We deny the petition, and dismiss as moot relator’s motion for temporary 

relief and all other pending motions. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Massengale, and Huddle.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 10, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, September 10, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19I0025. ADVANTAGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SYSTEMS v. ERIC CLEVELAND, et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: SU17CV0541
#### Edward Louis CABANA, Appellant, v. Grover Cleveland PHILLIPS, Appellee.

No. 70-228.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 11, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
#### F. T. WALLACE, DIVISION OF CARMEL INDUSTRIES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, Appellee.

No. 73-1322.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 5, 1974.

Frank, Strelkow & Gay and Richard H. Krinzman, Miami Beach, for appellant.

*438Friedman, Britton & Stettin, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Fla.Stat. § 47.122, F.S.A. See also Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. Cameron, Fla.App. 1966, 190 So.2d 34.
#### PETER WOODLIN and EBEN. BLACKISTON *vs.*MARTHA HYNSON and WILLIAM HYNSON.

After depositions are published and *read*further testimony cannot be taken.

If the competency of a deposing witness is to be attacked, exceptions should be filed to notify the other side.

Petition for freedom.

In this case the court said in relation to the taking of depositions;

That after depositions had been returned and published and *readhy*the opposite party or his counsel, it was not competent for such party to file interrogatories and take further testimony. He must file his interrogatories before publication of the depositions on the other side; or if published, before reading them; otherwise the testimony will de rejected.

*225If the competency of a witness is to be attacked it must be done by filing exceptions, that the other party may have notice and prepare to support his witness.
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Mackie Designs Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for theperiod ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William A. Garrard, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| Dated:  May 15, 2003 | By:    | /s/ William  A. Garrard                                                                                                 |   |
|---------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                      |   | William A.  Garrard*Vice President, Finance and Chief  Financial Officer (Principal Financial  and Accounting Officer)* |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Mackie DesignsInc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rickey Moore, Appellant.

[721 NYS2d 279]

—Application by the *437appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated April 17, 1989 *(People v Moore,*149 AD2d 629), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered April 23, 1987.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see, Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745). Bracken, Acting P. J., O’Brien, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Brooktrout, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eric R. Giler, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|Date: March 16, 2005 |     |                                                                      
|-------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     | By: | /s/ERIC R. GILEREric R. Giler President
(Principal Executive Officer)

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Michael P. Mack, Chief Executive Officer of Garden Fresh Restaurant Corp. (the Registrant), do hereby certify
in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, (Section 906) that, based on my knowledge:



(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and



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



|                         |  |  | 
|------------------------ |  |  | 
|Dated: November 26, 2003 |  |  | 
|                         |  |  | 
|                         |  |  | 



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to
Registrant and will be retained by Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Allan Ward FREE, Appellant, v. HARDWARE MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 69-227.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

May 6, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Masakazu Kurushima,

1. I have reviewed this annual report
on Form 10-K of California Steel Industries, Inc. (the Registrant);

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of 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 annual 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) design 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 subsidiary, is made known to us by others within that entity, 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 year that has materially affected, or is reasonable 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 person performing the equivalent function):

(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: March 25, 2008



By:

/s/ MASAKAZU KURUSHIMAMasakazu KurushimaPresident and Chief Executive Officer