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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
         This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of Global Telecommunication Solutions, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         305,400
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  242,826
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (38,200)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               592,861
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,996,065
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       147,278
<OTHER-SE>                                 (24,841,060)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,353,430
<SALES>                                        306,963
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               306,963
<CGS>                                          223,283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  223,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,781,481
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,697,801)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,697,801)
<DISCONTINUED>                             (11,691,874)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             (1,420,172)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (14,809,847)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (1.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.04)



</TABLE>
# C_2015367EN.01000201.xml

| 5.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/2

---

CONSUMERS, HEALTH, AGRICULTURE AND FOOD EXECUTIVE AGENCY

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2014

(2015/C 367/04)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/chafea/about/document-register_en.html

---
#### Christine M. Maye, Respondent, v Taco Bell Corp., Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Wager, J.), dated December 13, 1989, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Wager at the Supreme Court. Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 173 (Thursday, September 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 45298]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19274]



[[Page 45298]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10532]


In the Matter of the Designation of Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-
Muslimin (JNIM), aka Jamaat Nosrat al-Islam wal-Mouslimin, aka Group 
for the Support of Islam and Muslims, aka Group to Support Islam and 
Muslims, aka GSIM, aka GNIM, aka Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen, as a 
Specially Designated Global Terrorist

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the person known as Jama'at Nusrat al-
Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), also known as Jamaat Nosrat al-Islam wal-
Mouslimin, also known as Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims, 
also known as Group to Support Islam and Muslims, also known as GSIM, 
also known as GNIM, also known as Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen, 
committed, or poses a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism 
that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, 
foreign policy, or economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously, I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: July 15, 2018.
Michael R. Pompeo,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2018-19274 Filed 9-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-3014

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Daman Charles Julian lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern

____________ Submitted: April 15, 2022 Filed: April 20, 2022 [Unpublished]

____________ Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Daman Julian appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense and the district court 1 imposed the sentence jointly recommended by the parties. His counsel has

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, then United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, now Chief Judge.moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738

(1967), questioning the substantive reasonableness of Julian’s sentence. Julian has filed a pro se brief challenging his plea and sentence, and asserting that counsel was ineffective. He has also moved for appointment of new counsel. To the extent Julian challenges the voluntariness of his plea, we conclude that argument is not cognizable on appeal, as Julian did not present it to the district court. See United States v. Washington , 515 F.3d 861, 864 (8th Cir. 2008) (explaining a claim the plea was involuntarily or unknowingly entered is not cognizable on direct appeal where defendant failed to present claim to district court by motion to withdraw guilty plea). We also conclude Julian may not challenge his sentence on appeal because he agreed to the district court’s imposition of the sentence. See United States v. Nguyen , 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1995) (“A defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself to specific sentence may not challenge that punishment on appeal.”). Finally, we decline to decide Julian’s claim that counsel was ineffective, as this claim is best addressed in collateral proceedings. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez , 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006). After independently reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, deny Julian’s motion for new counsel, and affirm.

______________________________

-2-
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350)

In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2015 (the "Report") of Garrison Capital Inc. (the "Registrant"), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Brian Chase, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best
of my knowledge, that:

| | (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 results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









|/s/  Brian Chase | 
|---------------- | 



Brian Chase

Chief Financial Officer

November 4, 2015
#### Hyacinth Cespedes, Respondent, et al., Plaintiff, v City of New York, Appellant.

? an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), dated December 12, 1988, as denied that branch of its motion which was to dismiss the action insofar as it is asserted on behalf of Hyacinth Cespedes on the ground that the claims asserted on behalf of that plaintiff were not timely interposed, and as granted the plaintiff Hyacinth Cespedes’ cross motion to strike the defendant’s affirmative defense alleging that the action insofar as asserted on her behalf was not timely pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-i.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the plaintiffs cross motion is denied, and that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted on behalf of Hya*641cinth Cespedes for failure to comply with General Municipal Law § 50-i, is granted.

The one-year-and-90-day Statute of Limitations of General Municipal Law § 50-i is tolled from the time a plaintiff commences a proceeding for leave to serve a late notice of claim until an order granting that relief goes into effect *(see, Giblin v Nassau County Med. Center,*61 NY2d 67, 72; *Barchet v New York City Tr. Auth.,*20 NY2d 1, 6). Here, the respondent commenced such a proceeding by order to show cause. "CPLR 2211 specifically provides that a motion brought on by [an] order to show cause is made when served and not when signed” *(Mortgage Affiliates Corp. v Jerder Realty Serv.,*62 AD2d 591, 593, *affd*47 NY2d 796; *see also,*CPLR 2211; Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C2211:4). Therefore, the Statute of Limitations was tolled from August 18, 1987, until October 23, 1987, a total of 66 days. Adding the 66 days to the original deadline for service of the summons and complaint, December 1, 1987, we find that the last day on which the plaintiff Hyacinth Cespedes could have served her summons and complaint was February 5, 1988. Therefore, service on February 10, 1988, was untimely and failed to comply with General Municipal Law § 50-i.

We have examined the plaintiff Hyacinth Cespedes’ remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Fiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2011 (the Report) of Solar Senior Capital Ltd. (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, NICHOLAS RADESCA, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant,
hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

(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 results of operations of the Registrant.



|      |  |                        
|----- |  | -----------------------
|      |  | /S/    NICHOLAS
RADESCA
|Name: |  | Nicholas Radesca       
|Date: |  | November 1, 2011
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40481

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RENE GONZALEZ-DAVILA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-97-CR-385-1

- - - - - - - - - -

October 20, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Rene Gonzales-Davila, has filed

a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no

nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH

CIR. R. 42.2.
Standard Form 144 (Rev. 10/95) Page 2
Office of Personne! Management
‘The Guide to Processing Personnel Actions

STATEMENT OF PRIOR FEDERAL SERVICE
To be Completed by Employee
1, Name (Last, First, Middle Initial) 2. Social Security Number 3, Dateof Birth (Month, Day, Year)

4, Does the application or resume that you submitted, for the position to which you are being appointed, list ail of your Federal government
civilian and uniformed service, including beginning and ending dates, as well as the type of appointment and work schedule for civilian service?
© Yes — It "Yes", check this block and skip to tem 8. [=] No — If "No", check this biock and complete Items 5 - 9,

5. List below your prior civilian service. include service with the DC Government on appointments made before October 1, 1987.

FROM To TYPE OF APPOINTMENT
NAME AND LOCATION OF AGENCY AND WORK SCHEDULE
Year | Month | Day | Year | Month | Day | (Full-Time, Part-Time, or intermittent)

6. During periods of employment shown in Item 5, did you have a total of more than 6 months’ absence without pay during any one calendar

year?
Yes — If “Yes”, list the following information. I Nb — If “No”, go to Item 7.
TYPE OF ABSENCE, IF KNOWN FROM To TOTAL
(LWOP, Furlough, Suspension, AWOL,
or Placement in Nonpay Status) Year | Month | Day | Year | Month | Day | YEARS | MONTHS DAYS

7. List all uniformed service below. List active service in any branch of the Armed Forces of the United States, including active duty as 8
reservist, and active service in the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

FROM To
BRANCH OF SERVICE DISCHARGE
Year | Month | Day | Year | Month | Oay {Honorable or Dishonorable)

8. Do you claim any type of veterans’ preference which has not been verified?
[No £2) Yes — Check one of the statements, if it applies to you. | claim preference as the:
TS Spouse of a disabled veteran [7] Mother of a deceased or disabled veteran (—] Unmarried widow/widower of a veteran

8. CERTIFICATION: The prior Federal civilian and uniformed service listed on my application/resume and listed above constitutes my entire
record of Federal employment. | have no other Federal service for which | want to claim credit.
T

‘Signature | Date

|

NSN 7540-00-634-4101 Previous Edition Usable 144-114
“U.S. Government Printing Office: 1998 - 404-761/3240"
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-21-00558-CR

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 20-06-17345

Style: Jonte Larue Grant

v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: February 15, 2022

Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time

Party filing motion: State

Document to be filed: State’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: January 21, 2022

Number of previous extensions granted: 0

Date Requested: 60 days

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

Because this Court has issued an opinion dismissing this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, this

motion is dismissed as moot.

Judge's signature: /s/ April L. Farris

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Rivas-Molloy, and Farris

Date: February 17, 2022
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Benny Cipolla, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), rendered May 16, 1983, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

***CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM***

 

We have issued our report dated February 18, 2005, accompanying theconsolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of OSE USA, Inc. (formerly Integrated Packaging Assembly Corporation) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of saidreport in the Registration Statements of OSE USA, Inc. (formerly Integrated Packaging Assembly Corporation) on Form S-8 (Numbers 333-49365, 333-30457, 333-05571 and 333-88341). 

 

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP 

 

San Francisco, California 

March 31, 2005
#### Fritz Magliore, Appellant, v Simphore P. Severe, Respondent.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Graci, J.), entered January 12, 1990, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

*593We find that there are questions of fact concerning whether the window in the plaintiff’s room was "jammed” shut, whether the defendant was negligent in permitting the window to be "jammed”, and, if so, whether that condition was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries *(see, Buckingham v Donarry Realty Corp.,*25 AD2d 722, 722-723).

We have considered the plaintiff’s other contention and find that it is without merit *(see, Morales v City of New York,*70 NY2d 981, 983-984; *East Ramapo Cent. School Dist. v Orange-town-Monsey Hebrew School,*141 AD2d 693). Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
EX-10.25



 Exhibit 10.25 

DIRECT STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT 

THIS DIRECT STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this “DSPA”) is made as of January 30, 2014, by and between Burlingame Equity Investors
Master Fund LP, whose address is One Montgomery Street, 33rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 (“Stock Seller”) and Arête Industries Inc., a Colorado corporation, whose address is 7260
Osceola Street Westminster, CO 80030 (“Stock Purchaser”). 
  

	 	1.	Pursuant to a certain CONDITIONAL STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT (the “CSOA”) entered into as of December 10th, 2013 between “Stock Seller” and Nicholas L Scheidt “Stock Purchaser”.
“Stock Seller” optioned 1,341,873 shares to Nicholas L Scheidt and Nicholas L Scheidt, subsequently assigned 1,200,000 shares of the “CSOA” to Arête Industries Inc on January 27, 2012. 


 

	 	2.	The Stock Seller wishes to sell, and the Stock Purchaser wishes to buy, 1,200,000 shares of Arête at a price of US $0.19 per share for total consideration of $228,000.00. 


 

	 	3.	Stock Purchaser shall directly wire $228,000.00 to “Stock Seller” brokerage account for a direct repurchase of the shares. Upon receipt of good funds for the purchase; “Stock Seller” shall instruct
its Broker to deliver the 1,200,000 shares to the account designated by the Stock Purchaser. 

  

	 	4.	This DSPA shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon “Stock Seller” and “Stock Purchaser” and their respective representatives, successors and assigns. 


 

	 	5.	The Stock Seller represents and warrants to the Stock Purchaser that no assignment or lien has been given on the Sellers’s interest in their ownership in the above common stock, other than under the CSOA referenced
in Item 1 above. 

  

	 	6.	The Stock Seller represents and warrants to the Stock Purchaser that it is authorized to enter into this sale, and the Stock Purchaser represents and warrants to the Stock Seller that it is authorized to enter into this
purchase. 

  

	 	7.	The Stock Seller hereby assigns any and all claims against and economic interest in the above Arête Industries Inc common stock to the Stock Purchaser without any reservation of rights. 


 

	 	8.	This DSPA shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 

  

	 	9.	This DSPA shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. 

  

	 	10.	This DSPA may be executed in counterparts. 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, “Stock Seller” and “Stock Purchaser” have executed this DSPA of as of the
date first above written. 
  

			
	STOCK SELLER:
	
	Burlingame Equity Investors Master Fund, LP
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Blair Sanford



 

			
	Print Name:	 	Blair Sanford
	Title:	 	Managing Member of General Partner


 
			
	
	STOCK PURCHASER:
	
	Arête Industries Inc,
	A Colorado Corp
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Nicholas L Scheidt





			
	Print Name:	 	Nicholas L Scheidt
	Title:	 	CEO
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2013 (the Report) of Garrison Capital Inc. (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Joseph Tansey, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that: (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 results of operations of the Registrant. /s/ Joseph TanseyJoseph Tansey Chief Executive Officer November 5, 2013