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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED APRIL 30, 1997 AND THE BALANCE SHEET AT APRIL 30, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000849433
<NAME> ANSOFT CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                             312
<SECURITIES>                                     7,150
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,129
<ALLOWANCES>                                       125
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,098
<PP&E>                                             724
<DEPRECIATION>                                     944
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,951
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,034
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            90
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,827
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,951
<SALES>                                         11,950
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,188
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,740
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,870)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       420
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,450)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,450)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.81)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION OF
PRESIDENT


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350




In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Blackhawk Capital Group
BDC, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Craig
A. Zabala, as President of the Company, hereto certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities 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.





Date:      November
18, 2010





/s/ Craig A. ZabalaCraig
      A. ZabalaPresident(Principal
      Executive Officer)





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 Blackhawk Capital Group BDC Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### Alejandro MENDIOLA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 84-1288.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 31, 1985.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robin H. Greene, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

*76Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Jacki B. Gearnter, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HENDRY, HUBBART and JOR-GENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The order revoking the defendant Alejandro Mendiola’s probation is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to discharge the defendant Mendiola from the cause based on the following, briefly stated legal analysis.

First, we agree with the Fourth District Court of Appeal in *Tamer v. State,*463 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), that, in the absence of a controlling United States Supreme Court decision — of which there is none in this case — we must follow *State v. Dodd,*419 So.2d 333 (Fla.1982), which holds that the search and seizure exclusionary rule of Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution is applicable to probation revocation hearings. *See also Cross v. State,*469 So.2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Second, the trial court found below that a quantity of cocaine seized by police from the defendant Mendiola was obtained in violation of Mendiola’s Fourth Amendment rights, but, then, erroneously refused to suppress the illegally seized evidence on the ground that the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment and of Article I, Section 12 was inapplicable to probation revocation hearings. Third, the illegally seized evidence admitted below formed the sole basis for the probation revocation order under review.

We nonetheless join both the Second and Fourth District Courts of Appeal, *Cross v. State, supra; Tamer v. State, supra,*in certifying to the Supreme Court of Florida for further review, pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(5) of the Florida Constitution, the following question as being one of great public importance:

> Under the 1983 Amendments to Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution, does the exclusionary rule apply in probation revocation hearings?

Reversed and remanded.
**Exhibit 10.39**

**2010 PERFORMANCE-BASED INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN**

**Purpose**

This 2010 Performance-BasedIncentive Plan (the “2010 Incentive Plan”) is being established by the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of NightHawk Radiology Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) inorder to tie a portion of an Eligible Employee’s compensation for 2010 to the Company’s financial performance. This 2010 Incentive Plan will be applicable to all employees of the Company, including all officers of vice president level andabove of the Company (each, an “Eligible Employee”). 

**Funding of 2010 Incentive Plan Pool**

The 2010 Incentive Plan will be funded based upon the Company’s financial performance for 2010, as measured by the Company’s 2010 adjustedEBITDA (“EBITDA”). Specifically, if the Company’s adjusted EBITDA exceeds a threshold percentage of the Company’s budgeted EBITDA (as established by the Compensation Committee), the amount of incentive compensation available tobe paid out pursuant to the 2010 Incentive Plan will increase by a specified percentage of the target pool amount (subject to a cap determined by the Committee). 

**Payment to Individual Employees**

Oncethe overall funding percentage is established, payments will be made to the Eligible Employees equal to the Eligible Employee’s targeted incentive compensation amount multiplied by the Funded Percentage; provided, however, that an EligibleEmployee’s overall incentive compensation for 2010 can be reduced by the Chief Executive Officer by up to 40% based upon the individual’s overall performance and the Company’s performance on its Customer-Driven Focus andOperational Excellence goals (subject to approval by the Committee). To be clear, in no event, however, will an Eligible Employee’s 2010 incentive compensation exceed the funded percentage based upon the Company’s adjusted EBITDA. Further,the Chief Executive Officer’s overall incentive compensation will also be subject to a 40% reduction using the same criteria as are used by the Chief Executive Officer for the other Eligible Employees; provided, however, that the determinationof what percentage the Chief Executive Officer’s overall incentive compensation will be reduced by shall be subject to final approval by the Committee.
First Amendment to the Employment with Candace Formacek



 Exhibit 10.7 
  
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO 
 EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 FIRST
AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of August 12, 2005, between Chesapeake Corporation, a Virginia corporation (the “Company”), and Candace C. Formacek (the “Executive”). 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into an Executive
Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated January 3, 2005; and 
  
 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Agreement may be amended by mutual consent of the Company and the Executive; and 
  

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Agreement; 
  
 NOW THEREFORE, the Agreement is hereby amended in the following respects: 
  
 Section 1 (b) is amended to read as follows: 
  
 (b) The period described in paragraph (a) shall be extended for an
additional twelve months unless the Company, before each November 1 of any year, provides written notice to the Executive that the period will not be extended. The preceding sentence shall first be effective to extend the period described in
paragraph (a) until December 31, 2007, unless written notice to the contrary is provided to the Executive by the Company before November 1, 2005. 
  
 Except as provided above, the terms of the Agreement, dated January 3, 2005, shall remain in effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to
Executive Employment Agreement to be duly executed on its behalf and the Executive has duly executed this First Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement, all as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	EXECUTIVE	 	CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION
		
	 /s/ Candace C. Formacek

	 	 /s/ J.P. Causey Jr.


	Candace C. Formacek	 	J.P. Causey Jr.
	 	 	 Executive Vice President, Secretary &
 General
Counsel
## SERVE D JANUAR Y 13 , 201 0 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N ^^ ^ ^W^M^f^ ^

OFFIC E O FHEARING S i >i S WASHINGTON , D C I N TH E MATTE RO F FEDERA LEXPRES S CORPORATIO N FA A DOCKE T NO . CP09AL000 5 (Civi l Penalty Action ) DM S No . FAA-2009-009 9 

### NOTIC E O FHEARIN GDATE S NOTIC E I S HEREB Y GIVE N tha t testimon y an devidenc e wil l b e hear dan dconsidere d o n Jun e 2 1 an d22,2010 , at th e U.S . Distric t

Cour t fo r th e Distric t

o f Alaska , 22 2 W . 7" " Avenue , Anchorage , Alask a99513. ' Hearing s wil l commenc e at 9:0 0 a.m . an dconclud e at 4:3 0 p.m . eac hday . Th e partie s shoul dvacat e th e courthous e o n o r befor e 5:0 0 p.m . eac hday . Settle dcase s wil l no t b e remove dfro mth e docke t unti l th e Judg e receive s th e prope r pleading(s) . Pleading s ma y b e forwarde db y fax , expres s mail , courie r o r posta l service . S O ORDERED . Itichar dC . Goodwi n U.S . Administrativ e Law Judg e Attachmen t

- Servic e Lis t

' Th e partie s ar

e advisedt o chec k wit hthe Clerk' s offic

e to confir mthe exact

courtroo mo n the da y o f the hearing .FA A Docke t No . CP09AL000 5 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) SERVIC E LIS T ORIGINA L& ON E COP Y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2W1000 ' ON E COP Y • Courtne y E . Felts , Staf

f Attorne y I I Federal Expres s Corporatio n Regulatory Affairs , Lega l Departmen t 362 0 Hack s Cros s Roa d Buildin g B , 3rdFloo r Memphis , TN 3812 5 . _ TEL : 901-434-863 2 FAX : 901-434-828 3 Glen n H . Brown , Senio r

Attorne y Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counse l Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 22 2 W . 7thAvenu e #1 4 Anchorage , A K

9951 3 TEL : 907-271-521 7 FAX : 907-271-280 0 Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwin , Administrativ e La w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mE12-32 0 Washington , D.C . 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-213 9 Attorney-Adviso r 202-366-512 1 Lega l Assistan t FAX : 202-366-753 6

^ Servic e wa s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i n perso n o r b y expedite dcourier , us e th e followin g address : Federa l Aviatio n Administration, 60

0 Independenc

e Avenue, S.W. , Wilbu

r Wrigh t Building—Suit

e 2W1000 , Washington

, D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearin

g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 .
*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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 6, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-30012

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FLOYD NELLUMS, JR., also known as David Winters,

also known as Joseph Lewis, also known as

Lattian Mouton, also known as Kevin McGahey,

DefendantAppellant.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:05-CR-20036-ALL 

----------------------------------------------------------------

Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Assistant Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Floyd Nellums, Jr., has filed

a motion to withdraw and brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Nellums

filed a response arguing that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary as to the amount of loss
-2-

used to enhance hissentence and that the district court clearly erred in enhancing hissentenced based

on that loss amount. 

Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Nellums’s response discloses no

nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 387

Recognizing the American Society of Civil Engineers for reaching its 150th

Anniversary and for the many vital contributions of civil engineers to

the quality of life of our Nation’s people including the research and

development projects that have led to the physical infrastructure of

modern America.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 25, 2002

Mr. BARTON of Texas (for himself and Mr. MOORE) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Science

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the American Society of Civil Engineers for

reaching its 150th Anniversary and for the many vital

contributions of civil engineers to the quality of life of

our Nation’s people including the research and development projects that have led to the physical infrastructure

of modern America.

Whereas, founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers is the Nation’s oldest national engineering society;

Whereas civil engineers work to constantly improve buildings,

water systems, and other civil engineering works through

research, demonstration projects, and the technical codes
2

•HCON 387 IH

and standards developed by the American Society of Civil

Engineers;

Whereas the American Society of Civil Engineers incorporates educational, scientific, and charitable efforts to

advance the science of engineering, improve engineering

education, maintain the highest standards of excellence in

the practice of civil engineering, and ensure the public

health, safety, and welfare;

Whereas the American Society of Civil Engineers represents

the profession primarily responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of the Nation’s roads,

bridges, airports, railroads, public buildings, mass transit

systems, resource recovery systems, water systems, waste

disposal and treatment facilities, dams, ports and waterways and other public facilities that are the foundation

on which the Nation’s economy stands and grows; and

Whereas the Nation’s civil engineers, through innovation and

the highest professional standards in the practice of civil

engineering, protect the public health and safety and ensure the high quality of life enjoyed by the Nation’s citizens: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) acknowledges the American Society of Civil

4 Engineers for its 150th Anniversary;

5 (2) commends the many achievements of the

6 Nation’s civil engineers; and

7 (3) encourages the American Society of Civil

8 Engineers to continue its tradition of excellence in
3

•HCON 387 IH

1 service to the profession of civil engineering and to

2 the public.

Æ
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2011 - 0919 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010 -NM - 088 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 57 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 57

 Condemning the heinous atrocities that occurred on March 5, 2001, at 
               Santana High School in Santee, California.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 8, 2001

   Mr. Hunter (for himself, Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Issa, Mrs. Davis of 
California, Mrs. Bono, Mr. Lewis of California, Mr. Herger, Mr. Dreier, 
    Mr. Calvert, Mr. Gary Miller of California, Mr. Doolittle, Mr. 
 Radanovich, Mr. Horn, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Pombo, Mrs. Tauscher, Mr. 
 Thomas, Mr. Matsui, Mr. Filner, Mr. Sherman, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Ose, Mr. 
 Berman, and Mr. Lantos) submitted the following resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Condemning the heinous atrocities that occurred on March 5, 2001, at 
               Santana High School in Santee, California.

Whereas on March 5, 2001, a gunman opened fire at Santana High School in Santee, 
        California, killing 2 students and wounding 13 others: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the heinous 
        atrocities that occurred on March 5, 2001, at Santana High 
        School in Santee, California;
            (2) offers its deepest condolences to the families, 
        friends, and loved ones of those killed in the shooting;
            (3) expresses hope for the rapid and complete recovery of 
        those wounded in the shooting;
            (4) applauds the hard work and dedication exhibited by 
        local and State law enforcement officials and by others who 
        offered support and assistance;
            (5) commends the rapid response by the faculty and staff of 
        Santana High School in evacuating its students to safety in an 
        efficient and effective manner; and
            (6) encourages the people of the United States to engage in 
        a national dialogue on preventing school violence.
                                 <all>
```
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Jaak ?. Hemphill 

Oounty Auditor 

Upton county 

BsWn, Taxa 

. 

Dear sir: 

of thxd.- 

ad8 in part an 

inion on eaoh of 
Ronorable Jaak F. Ilemphill, pego 2 
Honorebls Jack F. Hemphill, page 3 

Under Brticl66 3883 end 3891, Vornon*s Aunoteted 

Ci+iil Stabutoe, t ho 6mx26uun ccqpsnrat;ion end the 6X0668 tebs 

%llowed to bs retelnsd by the county judge, county aad Uistslct o&irke, ecu&y attorn%y, aherirr, end ta~,e%a6saorcollector 16 $3000.00 each ~por year. The county offlalel.6 

Of mid OOUnty. em n01 cOmpaB6et~d on an RIUZURl 6alarjr bea$a. 

The tinimum @elary,-ef fall. raid county offioiels, sxooptin&j 

the auditor and the county oomml66ionors cannot br less then 

the total sum earned by ~6ach 66 oompsn~satlon by 6.al.d oftlcor 

in hia aeid otflciel capeoitg for the fieoel year 1935. Tho 

meximnrn salary of seld Ofrid oannot be more then tho 

mexianuu allowed oech of said offioials undar law6 ati8t‘ing 

An&gist 24, 1935, except that 6uch mexlmum may be inoree%ed 

one prr oent for .eaah $llOOO,O~O.OO ~veluetion or fraotional 

* part ther6oi, An exoaa6 of #l0,000(~00.00 .veluetlon ovdr an4 

above ths ~ximum amount allowed saoh ofiiasre ~undsr lawtb 

sxistlpg cm August ~24; 1935; provided, how6War, no salarias 

oovored by 6eld Ssotion 15, supra; shall 6xoeed the 6~6 of. 

~.:$4*~500.00. _~' ~' 
Honoreblo Jack F. Hemphill, pegs 4 

we now cousidor ycur .QwEt~On wf&h roraronca 

tom the animal salam of the oounty audtt~f. Soot&on 1 

0r Sonete Bill no. 119, AOt6 or th6 47th h~iEl6tUFtl, 

19W; providsbr 
Honorable Saolc B. Hsmphill, page 5 

*xn oouutiee &l&~ the, rollowi& asseward ta3&a8ions, respwtival~, as &hmn by tha total.asssserd 

valuationa or all pxwpsrBi4r ~OertWlad’by the oowtf 
Honozwble Jaok F. Eemphill, pago 6 

and 1484 than $30,000,000 not to exoaad 

ard411 williem8 

AHtAMM 

A88i%ttult
[No. 36307-7-I.

Division One.

June 17, 1996.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Barbaro Arnaoponce, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 94-1-07108-1, Brian D. Gain, J., entered February 17, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.