alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FORM 10-Q/A

      		  SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
	           		WASHINGTON, DC 20549


	   Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15 (d) of
     		 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934


     		For Quarter Ended September 30, 1996

     		  Commission File Number:  33-93310 


               			     95 TCI, Inc.                                 
  (Exact Name of registrant as specified in its charter)

               			      Florida                             
  (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)          

              			    59-3312856                   
        		(IRS Employer Identification Number)


       		150 Second Avenue North, Suite 800
		           St Petersburg, Fl 33701   
      		  (Address of Principal Offices)

	
              			 (813) 898-1500                   
  	(Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has (1) filed all reports required
to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period than the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days.

		       YES   X     NO       

         		 Common Stock $1.00 Par Value
			                  (Class)

200 Shares of Common Stock Outstanding as of October 24, 1996



<PAGE>


                			    SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


					 95 TCI, Inc.
					 (Registrant)


 
March 21, 1997                      /S/ G. Kurtis Ulrich  
---------------------              ---------------------------
Date                               G. Kurtis Ulrich, President  
				   



March 21, 1997
ubx-ex1019d_232.htm



Exhibit 10.19D

 

AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO EXCLUSIVE LICENSE AGREEMENT

 

THIS Amendment No. 3 to Exclusive License Agreement ("Amendment 3") is made and entered into this 5th day of May, 2015 ("Effective Date of Amendment 3"), by and between the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research ("Mayo") having its principal place of business at 200 First Street SW, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, and Unity Biotechnology, Inc. (formerly known as Cenexys, Inc.), a Delaware corporation, having a place of business at 1700 Owen Street, Suite 535 San Francisco, California 94158 ("Company"), for purposes of confirming the parties' intent and agreement as set forth herein.

 

BACKGROUND

 

Mayo and Company are parties to an Exclusive License Agreement, with an effective date of the 28th day of June, 2013 ("Agreement"), which confirms the parties' intent and agreement to grant an exclusive license to Mayo's certain patent rights and a nonexclusive license to certain know-how along with Amendment No. I and Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement. Mayo and Company wish to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment No. 3, and, accordingly, Mayo and Company agree as follows:

 

AMENDED TERMS

 

Exhibit A in its entirety will be deleted and replaced with the exhibit attached to this Amendment No. 3.

 

All other terms of the Agreement and Amendment No. 2 shall remain in full force and effect for the term of the Agreement and as set forth in the Agreement.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Mayo and Company hereby enter into this Amendment No. 3, effective as of the date first set forth above.

 

 


	
Unity Biotechnology, Inc.
	
 
	
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

	
By:/s/ Nathaniel E. David

Name: Nathaniel E. David, PhD

Title: President
	
 
	
By: /s/ Daniel D. Estes

Name: Daniel D. Estes

Title: Assistant Treasurer




 

 




***Certain information contained herein has been omitted pursuant to Regulation S-K 601(b)(10).

Confidential treatment has been granted with respect to the omitted portions.





EXHIBIT A

PATENT RIGHTS

 

 

[***]

 

***Certain information contained herein has been omitted pursuant to Regulation S-K 601(b)(10).

Confidential treatment has been granted with respect to the omitted portions.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Lori A. Jones, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Analytical Surveys, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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 financialinformation 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 annual report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and the registrant’s have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour 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 quarterly report is beingprepared; 

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’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 suchevaluation; and 

 

c) Disclosed in this annual report any changein 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, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, 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 financialreporting 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 controlover financial reporting. 

Date: December 23, 2003

/s/ Lori A. Jones

      Lori A. Jones

      Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.2****Certifications**I, Thomas J. Koenig, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Day International Group, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin 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 andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: May 14, 2007 By:  /s/ Thomas J. Koenig    Thomas J. Koenig    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting Officer)
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ NO. 09-21-00318-CR

__________________ KYLE GENE CHISM, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TE XAS, Appellee

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ On Appeal from the 356th District Court Hardin County, Texas Trial Cause No. 25532

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In an open plea, appellant Kyle Gene Chism pleaded guilty to evading arrest or detention with a motor vehicle. Afte r conducting a sentencing hearing, the trial court found the two prior felonies included in the enhancement paragraphs in the State’s Notice of Intent to Enhance to be true and assessed Ch ism’s punishment at thirty-two years of confinement. Chism’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the appeal is frivolous. See2 Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On January 5, 2002, we granted an extension of time for Chism to file a pro se brief. Chism filed a pro se letter in response. The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that we need not addr ess the merits of issues raised in Anders briefs

or pro se responses. Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate c ourt may determine either: (1) “that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining th at it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error[;]” or (2) “that argua ble grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id. We have determined the appeal is w holly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the appell ate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeal. See id. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We a ffirm the trial court’s judgment. 1
AFFIRMED.

_________________________ W. SCOTT GOLEMON Chief Justice Submitted on April 19, 2022 Opinion Delivered May 18, 2022 Do Not Publish Before Golemon, C.J., Kr eger and Horton, JJ.

1 Chism may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Cruz, Appellant.

[655 NYS2d 364]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederic Berman, J.), rendered April 27, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 41/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was overwhelming evidence that defendant shared his codefendant’s intent to sell heroin to the undercover officer, including evidence that defendant acknowledged that he was "working”, accepted the undercover officer’s order for drugs, and instructed the codefendant to fill the order.

The court properly admitted limited background testimony regarding methods of operation of drug dealers and their ability to prevent drugs and prerecorded buy money from being recovered *(see, People v Kelsey,*194 AD2d 248). Defendant’s remaining arguments are without merit. Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Williams, JJ.
#### GREEN *v.*STATE

[No. 115,

September Term, 1961.]

*297
      *Decided December 26, 1961.*

The cause was submitted to Hammond, Prescott, HornEy, Marbury, and SybERT, JJ.

Submitted on brief by *Morris Lee Kaplan, Nathan Stern*and *Prank J. McCourt*for appellant.

Submitted on brief by *Thomas B. Pinan, Attorney General, James P. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Saul A. Harris*and *Julius A. Romano, State’s Attorney*and *Assistant State’s Attorney,*respectively, of Baltimore City, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The appellant, Francis Julius Green, was convicted by a jury on three indictments, each of which charged him with armed robbery. The court, after the jury’s findings of guilt, sentenced the appellant to twenty years in the Maryland Penitentiary under Indictment No. 4575, twenty years in the Maryland Penitentiary under Indictment No. 4576, the latter sentence to run consecutive to the sentence in No. 4575, and twenty years in the Maryland Penitentiary under Indictment No. 4577, the sentence to be concurrent with the sentence in No. 4576; making a total of forty years. From the judgments and sentences this appeal was taken.

His contentions are that a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal should have been granted, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction, that it was reversible error to admit into evidence the guns and holster taken from the defendant’s room as the result of an illegal search and seizure, that his confession was involuntary and should not have been admitted into evidence, that the lower court was unfair, and that the court appointed counsel was incompetent.

*298We find no merit in any of these contentions. This case was tried by a jury and the record does not disclose that any motion for directed verdict was made, so that there is nothing before us as to the sufficiency of the evidence. *Woodell v. State,*223 Md. 89, 162 A. 2d 468. There was no objection to the admission into evidence of the guns and holster claimed to have been obtained as the result of an illegal search and seizure, so that there is nothing for this Court to review on this point. *Gouker v. State,*224 Md. 524, 168 A. 2d 521, and cases cited therein; *Gray v. State,*224 Md. 76, 167 A. 2d 92. With reference to the admission of the confession into evidence, the record discloses that the trial court followed the usual procedure which has been approved by this Court. See for example *Ralph v. State,*226 Md. 480, 174 A. 2d 163, and *Presley v. State,*224 Md. 550, 168 A. 2d 510. Though there was conflicting evidence with regard to the confession, we find no error in the trial court’s ruling admitting it into evidence. Finally there is nothing in the record to show that the court was unfair, or his counsel incompetent. See *Woodell v. State, supra.*

*Judgments affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-29-1997
<CASH>                                           8,287
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,177
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     96,340
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               183,859
<PP&E>                                       1,252,565
<DEPRECIATION>                                 592,154
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 926,255
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          144,526
<BONDS>                                        456,931
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       130,823
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,857
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   926,255
<SALES>                                        453,573
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               453,573
<CGS>                                          425,657
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  425,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,043
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,038)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (9,150)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,888)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,888)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         973,096
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   72,175
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      15,992,440
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,027,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,396,279
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,210,447
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,396,279
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,449,252
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  863,601
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                356,072
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            356,072
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   356,072
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     6.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
260 La. 703

#### C. Elliot THOMPSON et al. v. Kermit FRYMIRE, Testamentary Executor of the Succession of Amella R. Barger.

No. 52087.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 11, 1972.

In re: C. Elliot Thompson, Sybil Thompson Hazleton, Joyce Thompson Johnson, R. Baylis Edmondson, Sr., and Edward Chehardy, Jr. applying for Certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of Ascension. 255 So.2d 443.

Writ denied. No error of law.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Abraham THOMAS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 53569.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 21, 1973.

In re: Abraham Thomas applying for writs of certiorari and habeas corpus.

Writ denied. Ruling of trial court correct.
Fw: Response to OMB Comments on CO NAAQS

Rosalina Rodriguez to: Sherry Russell 08/11/2011 10:39 AM

----- Forwarded by Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US on 08/11/2011 10:39 AM -----

From: Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Kymn, Christine J." <Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov>

Cc: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Richard Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen 

Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lewis Weinstock/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Deirdre 

Murphy/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Nealson Watkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph 

Somers/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, David Orlin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, James 

Hemby/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Bill Lamason/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Sherry 

Russell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/04/2011 04:38 PM

Subject: Response to OMB Comments on CO NAAQS

Hi, Christine:

Attached is a file with our response to the 2 comments we received with respect to monitoring under the 

CO NAAQS, currently under OMB review (with court ordered deadline for signature of August 12). 

Specifically, the two comments we addressed are: (1) rationale for the 1 million population threshold, and 

(2) consideration of comments regarding safety concerns for near-road monitors.

Please let us know if you have further comments. Thank you.

Rosalina M. Rodriguez

Associate Division Director, Health and Environmental Impacts Division, USEPA

919-541-5298

 Response to OMB 8-4-11 V3.docx