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

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
DECEMBER 31, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      76,900,524
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         731,554
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            15,200,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                461,099,272
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      72,754,985
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        73,316,000
<LOANS>                                    941,943,513
<ALLOWANCE>                                 11,328,359
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,632,095,082
<DEPOSITS>                               1,353,057,111
<SHORT-TERM>                               100,976,120
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         21,247,598
<LONG-TERM>                                 34,860,024
<COMMON>                                    40,428,420
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  81,525,809
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,632,095,082
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             80,301,707
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           29,596,714
<INTEREST-OTHER>                             1,484,696
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           111,383,117
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          49,507,425
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,823,550
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       56,052,142
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                2,900,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             321,256
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             56,693,553
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             19,786,030
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  19,786,030
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                14,015,430
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.69
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.58
<LOANS-NON>                                  2,663,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                 2,936,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               568,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              6,167,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            11,069,869
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                4,061,211
<RECOVERIES>                                 1,419,701
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           11,328,359
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        11,328,359
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
# C_2016202EN.01005101.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/51

---

Article 3

1.   The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:

| (a) | customs union; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

customs union;

| (b) | the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;

| (c) | monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;

| (d) | the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy;

| (e) | common commercial policy. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

common commercial policy.

2.   The Union shall also have exclusive competence for the conclusion of an international agreement when its conclusion is provided for in a legislative act of the Union or is necessary to enable the Union to exercise its internal competence, or in so far as its conclusion may affect common rules or alter their scope.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

GRETCHEN SZUSTAK,

Petitioner

v.

CAROL FORRELL,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 295 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 8th day of October, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
#### Andrew Sattalich, Appellant, *v.*Inez Liben, Also Known as Inez Berlin, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

February 5, 1959.

*150
      *Robert Meers*for appellant.

*Tingar \& Liven for*respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

A civil suit though groundless and ill motivated does not give rise to a cause of action for its prosecution.

The orders should be reversed, with $10 costs, and motion to dismiss the second counterclaim in the answer granted.

Concur — Heoht, J. P., Aurelio and Tilzer, JJ.

Orders reversed, etc.
#### Kam v. AMS Relocation, Inc.

25427

04/21/2004

Vacated & remanded
### NUMBER 13

- 11

- 00 280

- CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

CLIFTON KEENE

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 105 th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides , Vela, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Clifton Keene , by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss

his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.2(a).

Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed

the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our2

mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).

D elivered and filed the

4th day of August, 2011

.
EX-10.26



 Exhibit 10.26 

***Text Omitted and Filed Separately 

with the Securities and Exchange Commission 

Confidential Treatment Requested 

Under 17 C.F.R. Sections 200.80(b)(4) 

and 230.406 
 First
Amendment to License Agreement 
 AMENDMENT dated as of December 17, 2004, to the License Agreement with an Effective Date of
January 7th, 2004 between PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, a not-for-profit corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of New Jersey and having a principal place of business at 4 New South Building, Princeton, New Jersey 08544-0036, United States of America, (“PRINCETON”) and BIONANOMATRIX LLC, a limited liability company duly organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (hereinafter referred to as “Licensee”). 
 W I T N E S S E T H 

WHEREAS, the Parties have entered into the Agreement and would like to amend the Agreement; 

WHEREAS, the Parties now seek to amend the terms of the Agreement as set forth herein. 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants contained herein, the Parties agree to as follows: 

 

	1.	Section 6.1 shall be shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following language: 


License Payment. BioNanomatrix agrees to pay to Princeton a license fee of [...***...] (the “License Fee”). The License Fee shall be
payable by BioNanomatrix in [...***...]. In the event this Agreement is terminated by BioNanomatrix for any reason before the second anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement, then BioNanomatrix shall not be obligated to make
[...***...]. The License Fee is [...***...]. After payment of these amounts, there shall be no further payment obligations of BioNanomatrix except as set for the Sections 6.2 through 6.8. 

 

	2.	Section 5.4 (b) shall be shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following language: 


Bionanomatrix shall have raised at least [...***...] prior to [...***...]. 

 

							
	BIONANOMATRIX LLC	 		 		 	
				
	/s/ Michael T. Boyce-Jacino	 		 	Michael T. Boyce-Jacino	 	12/23/04
	By	 		 	Print Name	 	  Date
				
	PRINCETON UNIVERSITY	 		 		 	
				
	/s/ Michelle D. Christy	 		 	Michelle D. Christy	 	1/5/2005
	By	 		 	Print Name	 	  Date


  
 ***Confidential
Treatment Requested
# EUR-Lex - 21994A0103(36) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 21994A0103(36)

**Agreement on the European Economic Area - Protocol 35 on the implementation of EEA rules **

*
Official Journal L 001 , 03/01/1994 P. 0205 - 0205 *

PROTOCOL 35 on the implementation of EEA rules

Whereas this Agreement aims at achieving a homogeneous European Economic Area, based on common rules, without requiring any Contracting Party to transfer legislative powers to any institution of the European Economic Area; and

Whereas this consequently will have to be achieved through national procedures;

Sole Article

For cases of possible conflicts between implemented EEA rules and other statutory provisions, the EFTA States undertake to introduce, if necessary, a statutory provision to the effect that EEA rules prevail in these cases.
27706

#### State v. MacArthur

Affirmed and Reversed
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0703

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

KEITH POPE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 22, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 14 2024

08/14/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0703
# L_2004349EN.01007001.xml

| 25.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 349/70 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 349/70

---

Corrigendum to Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 78/2004 of 8 June 2004 amending Annex XIV (Competition rules), Protocol 21 (on the implementation of competition rules applicable to undertakings), Protocol 22 (concerning the definition of ‘undertaking’ and ‘turnover’ (Article 56) and Protocol 24 (on cooperation in the field of control of concentrations) to the EEA Agreement

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 219 of 19 June 2004
  )

Official Journal of the European Union L 219 of 19 June 2004

On page 22, in Annex IV, Article 8, point 7:

for:

‘7.   Where the EC Commission carries out investigations ...’,

read:

‘7.   Where the EC Commission carries out inspections ...’.

---
## THE STATE OF TEXAS MANDATE

TO THE 124TH DISTRIC T COURT OF GREGG COU NTY, GREETINGS: Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 5th day of May, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined;
and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Phyllis Gwen Pruitt, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 14

- 00216

- CR

Trial Court No. 43975

- B

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modi fy the trial court’s judgment by deleting the award of attorney fees

. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
We note that the appellant, Phyllis Gwen Pruitt, has adequately indicated h er inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs. WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed. WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 1st day of July , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
Exhibit 23  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements of Magellan Health Services, Inc.:  Form
  
  Registration Number
  
  Date FiledS-8
  
  333-151509
  
  5/20/2008S-8
  
  333-141056
  
  3/05/2007S-8
  
  333-134202
  
  5/17/2006S-8
  
  333-134201
  
  5/17/2006S-8
  
  333-134199
  
  5/17/2006S-8
  
  333-123222
  
  3/09/2005  of
our reports dated February 26, 2010, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Magellan Health Services, Inc., and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Magellan Health
Services, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Magellan
Health Services, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009.  Baltimore,
  MarylandFebruary 26,
  2010
#### Duro-Test Corporation, Plaintiff, *v.*Edward H. Ward, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Cayuga County,

October 8, 1958.

*Gleason & Doyle (John P. Doyle*of counsel), for plaintiff.

*Michaels, Port dk Cuddy (George M. Michaels*of counsel), for defendant.

James C. O’Brien, J.

The complaint does not allege that defendant has violated any confidence. His fault is that he, in violation of the contract, has accepted employment from a competitor of plaintiff. Against this, plaintiff is not entitled to protection (General Business Law, § 340).

The contract is too broad in its terms and is unenforcible. *(Paramount Pad Co.*v. *Baumrind,*4 N Y 2d 393; *Murray*v. *Cooper,*268 App. Div. 411, affd. 294 N. Y. 658.)

The motion is granted with $10 costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM ______________________________ [Identify specific financial statements] AND
IS QUALIFIED IT ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,129,465
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               20,656,501
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 21,854,632
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            50,262,414
<PP&E>                                      28,995,459
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             102,924,802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       33,063,210
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       109,222
<OTHER-SE>                                  55,366,828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               102,924,802
<SALES>                                     38,156,144
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,156,144
<CGS>                                       28,513,663
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               28,513,663
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,011,214
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             674,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,571,680
<INCOME-TAX>                                   889,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,681,998
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,681,998
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

      ( print page 941)    
                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et seq.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than January 31, 2013.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Yvonne Sparks, Community Development Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:

                    1.                     *Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc.,*                     Jacksonville, Illinois; to become a bank holding company through the termination of the election by Jacksonville Savings Bank, Jacksonville, Illinois to be treated as a savings association.                

Dated: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 2, 2013.

Michael J. Lewandowski,

Assistant Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2013-00046 Filed 1-4-13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
115 P.3d 686

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

July 11, 2005

26476

#### State v. McGovern

Affirmed
#### Myers v. South Seas Corp.

15086, 15117

5/4/94

Granted in part; Denied in part

871 P.2d 1235
#### State v. Bolosan.

15993

6/6/94

Granted

-P.2d-
INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
                               EARNINGS PER SHARE

                                 MARCH 31, 1997

Earnings per share is based upon the weighted average number of common and
common equivalent shares outstanding during the period as follows:

                                                     QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31
                                                     1997               1996
                                                -------------     -------------
Average common shares outstanding                   5,135,025         3,137,316
Net effect of dilutive stock options
   and warrants, based on the treasury
   stock method using average

   market price                                       920,949           453,762
                                                -------------     -------------
                                                    6,055,974         3,591,077

Net income                                          $ 518,012        $  236,768
                                                =============     =============
Earnings per share                              $         .09     $         .07
                                                =============     =============

The above table represents primary earnings per share. Fully diluted earnings
per share for the quarter ended March 31, 1997 and 1996 were the same as primary
earnings per share.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed December 13, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00821-CV FREDERICK ALTYMAN BROWN (JR.), Appellant V. JOE JORDAN TRUCKS, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-20105 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Nowell, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Reichek The deadline for filing this appeal, from the trial court’s March 25, 2021 summary judgment, was June 23, 2021 or, with an extension motion, July 8, 2021.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.1(a)(1). The notice of appeal was not filed, however, until September 21, 2021. Because the timely filing of a notice of a ppeal is jurisdictional, we questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal and directed appellant to file a letter brief addressing

our concern. See Brashear v. Victoria Gardens of McKinney, L.L.C. , 302 S.W.3d 542, 545 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.) (op. on reh’ g). Appellant complied, seemingly relying, in relevant part, on th e tolling of deadlines in the Texas Supreme–2– Court’s emergency Covid-19 orders. 1 As appellee notes in response, however, appellant did not separately re quest an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.3. And, while an extension request can be implied when the notice of appeal is filed within the exte nsion period, we cannot imply an extension request when, as here, the no tice of appeal is filed outs ide the extension period. See Naaman v. Grider , 126 S.W.3d 73, 74 (Tex. 2003) (per curiam); Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Accordingly, on the record before us, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(a).

210821F.P05

1 Although appellant’s letter brief appears to address on ly the merits of his appeal, the letter states it is in response to our request for jurisdictional briefing. Accordingly, we have libera lly construed the brief as also addressing the timeliness of the appeal. /Aman d a L. Reichek / AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

FREDERICK ALTYMAN BROWN (JR.), Appellant
No. 05-21-00821-CV V. JOE JORDAN TRUCKS, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-20105. Opinion delivered by Justice Reichek, Justices Nowell and Carlyle participating.

In accordance with this Court’ s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.
We ORDER that appellee Joe Jordan Trucks, In c. recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant Fre derick Altyman Brown (Jr.).
Judgment entered December 13, 2021.