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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          1,310
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                    1,846
<INVENTORY>                                     9,155
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               26,253 
<PP&E>                                         39,008
<DEPRECIATION>                                 14,938
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 96,773
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          22,429
<BONDS>                                         9,749
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       16,723
<OTHER-SE>                                     23,344
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   96,773
<SALES>                                        77,418 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              104,800
<CGS>                                          50,518         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  85,446 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  404
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              3,710
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                15,607
<INCOME-TAX>                                    6,412
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             9,195
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   772
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                    8,423
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>
<pre>

EXHIBIT 10.4  1999 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT OF ROBERT A.  SPIGNO

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective the 1st day of
September 1999 by and between Conectisys, Inc., a Colorado corporation
("CONECTISYS"), ("Employer"), and Robert A. Spigno ("Employee").

The following amendments to the language of the paragraphs as noted herein are
hereby amended to the initial signing of the Employment Agreement, dated
October 2, 1995, as follows: The amendments are effective September 1, 1999:

1.Employment and term. Employer hereby employs Employee and Employee hereby
accepts employment from Employer to perform the duties set forth below, for a
term of Five (5) years, subject to the provisions of this Agreement, and
thereafter shall be automatically extended for subsequent five (5) year terms
unless terminated as provided herein.  Employee's employment hereunder shall be
continued thereafter from term to term until either party shall give Sixty (60)
days prior written notice of termination.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, this
Agreement may be sooner terminated as provided in Paragraph 8 hereof.

2.    Duties.  Employee shall devote his full time and efforts to the business
of Employer, and shall be an officer of Conectisys holding the title of
President / CEO.

3.Compensation.  During the term of this Agreement, Employee shall receive as
compensation for his services, an annual base salary of One Hundred Sixty
Thousand Dollars ($160,000). During the subsequent terms of employment under
this agreement, Employer shall negotiate Employee's annual base salary in good
faith; provided, however, that Employer shall pay Employee an annual base
salary in such subsequent terms of employment in an amount no less than the
annual base salary paid Employee during the term hereunder.  Employee shall
further receive a bonus, paid at year end, equal to fifty percent (50%) of
employee's salary for compensation to the employee's continuing employment to
the Company ("Staying Bonus"). Staying Bonus shall be compensated for, with
Conectisys Corp. restricted common stock under rule 144 ("The Stock"). The
calculation for the value of the Stock will be, fifty percent (50%) of the
average bid and ask price for the stock for the 30 days prior to the issuance.
Employee shall have an option to purchase up to 2,000,000 shares of Conectisys
Corporation restricted stock under rule 144, at a cost of Fifty (50%) of the
average market value during the prior 30 days of trading; this option shall
remain open for Three (3) years with an option to renew said option for an
additional Three (3) years.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed as of the day and year first above written.

Employee: /s/ Robert A. Spigno
         Robert A. Spigno

Employer: /s/ Lawrence Muirhead
         Lawrence Muirhead
         Conectisys Corp.
         Chief Technical Officer

Employer:___________________________________
         Patricia A. Spigno
         Conectisys Corp.
         Secretary & Treasurer
#### Jonathan LITTLE and Hannah Little, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Anthony W. MITCHELL, Individually and as Director of the Department of Social Services of the State of Utah; James P. Wheeler, Individually and as Director of the Utah State Division of Family Services; John Doe I; John Doe II; and John Doe III, and the Utah State Division of Family Services, Defendants and Appellants.

No. 16678.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Dec. 11, 1979.

Robert B. Hansen, Atty. Gen., Sharon Peacock, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for defendants and appellants.

David E. Littlefield, Salt Lake City, for plaintiffs and respondents.

WILKINS, Justice:

Plaintiffs brought this action against the State Division of Family Services and the individual defendants alleging negligence in connection with placement, supervision and foster care given by them. The defendants asserted the defense of sovereign immunity and moved to dismiss the action on that *919ground. The court denied their motion. Defendants then proceeded under Rule 54(b), U.R.C.P. to have the trial court sign an order that the ruling was a final judgment and appealed that ruling to this Court. This Court entered its order dismissing the appeal. Within the 20 days allowed for doing so, the defendants filed a petition for rehearing.

The significant part of Rule 54(b) provides that when multiple claims and/or parties are involved, “. . . the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties . . [when] . there is no just reason for delay . ..” This does not necessarily mean that there is a final judgment merely because the order so recites. In this instance, the trial court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, thus leaving the parties in court, and there was, therefore, in fact no final judgment.1 The previously entered order of this Court granting the motion to dismiss the appeal is reaffirmed.

CROCKETT, C. J., and MAUGHAN, HALL and STEWART, JJ., concur.

1

. It is to be noted that a party is not left without remedy. If there are good and sufficient reasons for such an appeal before further proceedings and determination of the issues in the lawsuits, a party may petition the Supreme Court for an intermediate appeal as provided in Rule 72(b).
Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Tom Brown, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel G. Blanchard, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Daniel
G. Blanchard Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerMarch 25, 2003



QuickLinks
July 1, 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

KRISTIN WILKINSON , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00111

- CV V.

USAA FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK TRUST SERVIC ES, INDIV IDUALLY , AND AS TRUSTEE
, WILLIAMS, KHERKHER, HART & BOUNDAS, L.L. P., LOOPER REED & MCGRAW , P.C., AND WILLIAM W. MORRIS , Appellee s

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the summary judgment in favor of appellee s , USAA Federal Savings Bank Tru st Services, Individually , and as Trustee
, Williams, Kherkher, Hart & Boundas, L.L.P., Looper Reed & McGraw, P.C. , and William W. Morris, signed November 6, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant Kristin Wilkinson to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Salvatore D’Auria, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatthe Quarterly Report of Tut Systems Inc., on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results ofoperations of Tut Systems, Inc.

 

 
|                   | By:    | /s/ SALVATORE D’AURIA                                                            |   |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Salvatore D’Auria  President, Chief Executive Officer  and Chairman of the Board |   |
|                   |   |                                                                                  |   |
| Date: May 7, 2004 |   |                                                                                  |   |

 

----
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1052 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for direct payment 

to physician assistants under the Medicare program for certain services 

furnished by such physician assistants. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2019 

Ms. SEWELL of Alabama (for herself and Mr. SMITH of Nebraska) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

for direct payment to physician assistants under the 

Medicare program for certain services furnished by such 

physician assistants. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1052 IH

1 SECTION 1. DIRECT MEDICARE PAYMENT FOR SERVICES 

2 FURNISHED BY PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1832(a)(2)(B) of the So4 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395k(a)(2)(B)) is amended 

5 by adding at the end the following new clause: 

6 ‘‘(v) services of a physician assistant 

7 but only if no facility or other provider 

8 charges or is paid any amounts with re9 spect to the furnishing of such services;’’. 

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

11 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to services fur12 nished on or after July 1, 2020. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
CASE NO. 06-14-00097-CR 

In The 

COURT OF APPEALS 

SIXTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT TEXARKANA 

WILLIE FRANK JACKSON, Appellant 

VS. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 354th Judicial District Court 

of Hunt County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 29,295 

Honorable Richard A. Beacom, Jr., Judge Presiding 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE STATE'S BRIEF 

NOBLE DAN WALKER, JR. 

District Attorney, in and for 

Hunt County, Texas 

KELI M. AIKEN 

Assistant District Attorney 

State Bar Number- 24043442 

P.O. Box 441 

4th Floor, Hunt County Courthouse 

Greenville, Texas 75401 

Telephone Number- (903) 408-4180 

Facsimile Number- (903) 408-4296 

kaiken@huntcounty.net 

ACCEPTED

06-14-00097-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

4/13/2015 4:05:41 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 4/13/2015 4:05:41 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE STATE'S BRIEF 

Comes now, The State of Texas, and files this, her Motion for 

Extension of Time to File State's Brief. 

I. 

The current filing deadline for the State's brief was March 23, 2015. 

II. 

The State requests permission to file a brief by April 24, 2015. 

Ill. 

The State requests an extension because a new prosecutor has 

taken over this case and will need time to review the record to respond to 

the appeal. The prosecutor who handled this trial is no longer with our 

office. After the prior assistant left the office, we discovered that no 

response was filed in this case. We obtained a copy of the record as of 

Friday, April 10, 2015 and are working to respond to the appeal. 

IV. 

The State has made no previous requests for extensions to file her 

brief. 

V. 

The Appellant is not going to file an opposition to this motion. 
VI. 

For the reasons stated hereinabove, it is respectfully requested that 

this Court grant the State of Texas until April 24, 2015, to file her brief. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Is/ Keli M. Aiken 

Keli M. Aiken 

Assistant District Attorney 

Hunt County, Texas 

P.O. Box 441 

Greenville, Texas 75403-0441 

Phone: 903/408-4180 

Fax: 903/408-4296 

kaiken@huntcounty.net 
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

I certify that I conferred by telephone with Mr. Jason Duff today, 

April 13, 2015, regarding this motion, and Mr. Duff courteously agreed 

stated he would not file a motion in opposition to our request. 

Is/ Keli M. Aiken 

Keli M. Aiken 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that a true copy of this Motion to Extend Time to File 

State's Brief has been forwarded to Mr. Jason Duff on April 13, 2015 by 

placing the copy in his box in the Hunt County District Clerk's office per 

local rules. 

Is/ Keli M. Aiken 

Keli M. Aiken
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Peter L. Hauser, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on form 10-K/A for the year endedDecember 31, 2003 of Entrx Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report; and
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report isbeing prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 29, 2004 /s/ Peter L. HauserBy: Peter L. HauserPresident and Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LORI ANN MATLOCK,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-14-00118-CR 

Appeal from the

355th Judicial District Court

of Hood County, Texas 

(TC# CR12579) 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Test Kit Evaluation Submission Form 

The applicant must fill out the submission form and provide it along with the submission 

packet. The information provided in the submission form will be used in creating the 

certificate if the test kit meets all FGIS requirements; therefore, it is imperative that the 

form be filled out correctly. A fillable version of this form is available on the AMS Website.

Contact Information 

Applicant (i.e., test kit manufacturer)

Street Address

City, State, Zip Code

Contact Person

Phone Number

Email Address

Billing Address 

(if different than manufacturer’s address)

City, State, Zip Code

Test Kit Information 

Test Kit Name

Product Identification Number

Test Method Format

Reader Name

Reader Model or Identification Number

Detection Method

Upper Conformance Limit

Additional Commodities 

(list in alphabetical order)
Test Kit Evaluation Submission Form (continued) 

Design Criteria and Performance Specification Check List

The test kit meets the performance requirements and submission packet 

components are included. 

Initials 

Time for completion of analysis ≤ 30 minutes

FGIS reference method or equivalent used for reference analyses (validation report or 

literature reference provided if FGIS reference method not used)

Accuracy study for naturally contaminated corn and wheat from 0.50 – 30 ppm DON

Additional accuracy data for optional extension of upper limit of conformance above 30 

ppm DON in corn and wheat

Data supporting accuracy of multiple ranges of quantitation

Additional commodities – accuracy data; sample preparation and analytical procedure 

is described for each additional commodity (including grinding procedure); type of 

reference material is given (naturally-contaminated or standard-solution fortified)

Use of the test kit does not expose the employees to toxic or hazardous substances 

higher than OSHA Standards per 29 CFR when used without a fume hood or respirator. 

Use of the test kit does not generate radioactive waste, P-listed hazardous waste, or 

hazardous waste listed for its toxicity characteristic as defined in 40 CFR

Safety Data Sheets (SDS)

Reader electromagnetic field study certification statement (renewals exempt if same reader)

Temperature sensitivity study

Shelf life study

Certificates of analysis for reference materials

Written test kit instructions (provided as Microsoft Word document)

Method flow chart is included (optional)

Protocol & Notification Agreement Statement signed by applicant

Comments
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: November 23, 2016 

DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Z81. HOY 2 5 A q: I b 

DOCKET OPERATIONS 

Docket No. FAA-2013-1082 

Ridan Investments, Inc. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2012S0700133 

Respondent 

ORDER SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE 

On October 12, 2016, the undersigned judge issued a Notice of Hearing, setting the hearing 

to begin on January 24, 2017. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(l) and (7), it is hereby ORDERED: 

1. The parties shall appear by telephone for a prehearing conference with the undersigned 

judge on January 12, 2017 at 3pm Eastern time. 

2. The parties shall access the conference by dialing telephone number 888-204-5984 and 

then inputting access code 6392406 when prompted. 

3. During the conference, the parties shall be prepared to discuss the issues in dispute, the 

upcoming hearing, the status of any settlement negotiations, and any other related 

matters. 

Attachment: Service List 

DOUGLAS M. RAW ALD 

Administrative Law Judge 
SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

ONE COPY 

Lawrence M. Burek, Respondent's Counsel 

550 North Parkcenter Drive, Suite 204 

Santa Ana, CA 92705 

TEL: 714-564-9033 

F~: 714-564-1685 

Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 W. 7th Avenue, Box 14 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 

TEL: 907-271-5271 

FAX: 907-271-2800 

The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Docket No. FAA-2013-1082 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, UnitedStates District Judge for the District

of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2845

___________ Richard M. Hedrick, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Allen Pfeiffer; Gary A. Janssen; Dunn * L. Donald, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 5, 1999 Filed: April 5, 1999

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. RichardM. Hedrick appeals from the district court & s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against City of Waverly, Nebraska employees AllenPfeiffer and Gary A. Janssen, and City attorney Donald L. Dunn, in their individual and official capacities. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties & briefs, we conclude the district court & s judgment was correct, and an extended-2-

discussion is not warranted. We also deny Hedrick & s motion to assess excess costs against appellees’ counsel. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: ADOPTION OF J.D.M., JR.

PETITION OF: C.M., MOTHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 195 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

IN RE: ADOPTION OF C.D.M.

PETITION OF: C.M., MOTHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 196 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.