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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 724904
<NAME> ARIZONA INSTRUMENT CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       3,471,429
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,835,185
<ALLOWANCES>                                   186,155
<INVENTORY>                                    688,236
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,202,522
<PP&E>                                         793,971
<DEPRECIATION>                                 296,405
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,017,859
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,110,055
<BONDS>                                         10,691
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,832
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,893,972
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,017,859
<SALES>                                      9,052,505
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,183,746
<CGS>                                        3,252,610
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,132,775
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,731
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                782,441
<INCOME-TAX>                                   400,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            382,441
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   382,441
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28


</TABLE>
#### A. A. AUSTIN, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE *of*Texas, Appellee.

No. 28234.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 4, 1956.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The conviction is for the felony offense of driving while intoxicated; the punishment, thirty days in jail and a fine of $100.

*779The record on appeal contains no. statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular, and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit
32





Certification


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002


(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
United States Code)





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,
United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of MabVax
Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., does hereby certify, to such
officer’s knowledge, that:





The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of MabVax Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of MabVax Therapeutics
Holdings, Inc.





Date:
April 24, 2019

By:
/s/ J. David
HansenJ.
David HansenChief
Executive Officer (Principal
Executive
Officer)Date:
April 24, 2019

By:
/s/ Gregory P.
HansonGregory
P. HansonChief
Financial Officer (Principal
Financial
and Accounting Officer)





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Specimen stock certificate representing shares of common stock of the Registrant



 EXHIBIT 4.1 
  
 

 







 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 A statement of the rights, preferences,
privileges and restrictions granted to or imposed upon the respective classes or series of shares of the Corporation and upon the holders thereof as established by the Articles of Incorporation or by any certificate of determination of preferences,
and the number of shares constituting each series or class and the designations thereof, may be obtained by the holder hereof upon request and without charge from the Secretary of the Corporation at the Corporation’s corporate headquarters.
Exhibit 31.1
**TVIA, INC.**
**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO****SECTION 302 OF****THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Eli Porat, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tvia, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
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 we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures; and presented in this quarterly reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation;
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.
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.     Date: August 6, 2004    /s/ Eli Porat   Eli Porat Chief Executive Officer and President
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2010-NM-193-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-29-2000
<CASH>                                            236,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   4,648,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      414,000
<INVENTORY>                                     4,557,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               10,253,000
<PP&E>                                         15,408,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 11,918,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 14,973,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           4,202,000
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           45,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     10,510,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   14,973,000
<SALES>                                         9,068,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                9,068,000
<CGS>                                           5,068,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   8,423,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   49,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   761,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                      297,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               464,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      464,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0.11



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

UNDER

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

PACIFIC MERCANTILE BANCORP

Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A

for the quarter ended September 30, 2009

The undersigned, who is the Chief Financial Officer of Pacific Mercantile Bancorp (the Company), hereby certifies that (i) Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), to which this Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and
15(d) of the Exchange Act; and (ii) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 16, 2010 |  | /s/ NANCY A. GRAY                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|                     |  | Nancy A. Gray,                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|                     | 
|                     |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission on its staff upon request.
exv4w2



 





Exhibit 4.2



CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

OF

AMENDED AND RESTATED

CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

OF

TERAFORCE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION




(Pursuant to Section 242 of the General

Corporation Law of the State of Delaware)




     TeraForce Technology Corporation, a corporation organized and existing
under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “Corporation”),
does hereby certify as follows:



     FIRST: The Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation, as amended, is hereby amended by replacing Section 4.1 of ARTICLE
IV in its entirety and substituting the following in lieu thereof:




     “Section 4.1. TOTAL NUMBER OF SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK. The
total number of authorized shares of capital stock of all classes
which the Corporation shall have the authority to issue is
300,000,000, consisting of 250,000,000 shares of Common Stock, par
value $0.01 per share (the “Common Stock”), and 50,000,000 shares
of Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Preferred
Stock”).”


Other than Section 4.1 of ARTICLE IV, ARTICLE IV shall not be changed by this
Certificate of Amendment and shall remain in full force and effect.




     SECOND: The Board of Directors of the Corporation duly adopted resolutions
setting forth the above-referenced amendment, declaring such amendment to be
advisable, and calling for a vote of the stockholders of the Corporation on
such amendment.



     THIRD: The Stockholders of the Corporation duly approved the
above-referenced amendment.



     FOURTH: The above-referenced amendment was duly adopted in accordance with
the provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Certificate of
Amendment to be signed as of the 19th day of May, 2004.


	 	 	 	 	 
	 	TERAFORCE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Robert P. Capps
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	Robert P. Capps 	 
	 	 	Title:  	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 23.0**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of DirectorsEnzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-101898, 333-64110, 333-18051, 333-121468, 333-140282, 333-134453, and 333-132467) on Form S-8 and in the registration statement (No. 333-137723) on Form S-3 of Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our reports dated March 12, 2010, with respect  to the consolidated balance sheets of Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009, the related financial statement schedule, and the  effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which reports appear in the December 31, 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Short Hills, New JerseyApril 15, 2010
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: 

PMN: 09-0451 

Post Focus Draft 1 09/15/2009 

ENGINEER: Hall \ JAS 

PV (kg/yr): 

SUBMITTER: 

USE: 

OTHER USES: 

 

 

 

 

CRSS : 

Chemical Name: 

S-H20: 0.00002 g/L @ 

VP: 1.0E-6 torr @ 

MW: 521.00 %<500 %<1000 

Physical State and Misc CRSS Info: 

 

 

Consumer Use: 

SAT (concerns) (07/07/2009): 

Migration to groundwater: negligible
PBT rating: P2B1T1 

Health: 1-2 Inhalation 

Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 4 ppb) 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2-3B 

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: 

Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS: 

P2 Claim: 

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No 
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: 

PMN: 09-0451 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: 

PMN: 09-0451 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 
CBI: 

MEMORANDUM of CBI TELEPHONE CONVERSATION 

CALL BY: Jason A, Sese 

Organization: ERG 

CALL TO: Richard Jourdenais 

Organization: 

Date: 07/08/2009 

Time: 2:15 pm 

Phone: 

Concerning ? 

PMN: 09-0451
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

267) ll-K- (I) -80 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/200811:12:57 AM Sheet 267 of 325 
P.2 

y\m\ Pl 

 = o 

II-K-(I)-80 

REPORT ON THE 1980 MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES CONSUMPTION 

STUDY AND SURVEY OF LARGE COMBUSTORS 

DOE/Energy Information Administration 

January 1983 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

.II-K-(I)-8'cT
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 15.1

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

                 Re:     Massachusetts RRB Special Purpose Trust BEC-1
                         Registration on
                         Form S-3

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated November 15, 1999 on our review of interim
financial information of Massachusetts RRB Special Purpose Trust BEC-1 as of and
for the period ended September 30, 1999 and included in this Form 10-Q is
incorporated by reference in Massachusetts RRB Special Purpose Trust BEC-1
registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-74651-01). Pursuant to Rule
436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should not be considered a
part of the registration statement prepared or certified by us within the
meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

Very truly yours,



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
January 26, 2000
### 258

OFFICE OF TNE **A-ITORNEY** GENERAL OF TEXAS
.c. **AUSTIN**
:--!&!tz j!

**I** neuorablo HomerOarrieon, Jr. : DfreotOr, Department of Pub110Safety aolppl*Lbry Austin, Texas Dear sir: Attention: Hon -b-y;' ,:; :.7(,. #I: &j& Your requeet for reoeired and @arctpuy oonoldered by this do 

## otermmyour ref. Qobbtip&3

r011owI3r

mush grow?ohsokIf In your oplnng unlawi'ully aolleeted oarerully oonsldered the encaloeed ream6herein as,the eiameilplengthy. We servatlone upon said reports

arrest Is excessive. The ee Arttale 1065, Vernon’s Annotated Texae Code of Orlminal Prodeduro.)

Weenclose herewith oopiea of Opiniona! NOS. O-693and k963 whiah deal with arrest raea, oommltmnt fees

### .-_ 259

mnorable HomerOatikon, Jr., Page 2

and rsleaeb feeis, whloh will guide you in deternining whether or not such fee@ were Improperly aesessed andoolleeoted in auoh oaees,~ Thefaota in eaoh partloular oa.88, or gourse, determine the legality **or** lllegallty of suoh reea.

3. The twenty oases for reoklem or oaraleea driving were Inpro er beoauee Article 7'30, Vernrm*s Annotated Penal Code, P the reoklesrr or oarslees driving statute) has been held umonstitutional as a penal atatute. (See Ladd V. State, 27 8. W, (26) 1098). Officers should not eniorae or attempt to enforse orimlnal statuteo whloh harebeen heldunoonetltutlonal by the courts.

4. Artlole 827e, Vernonlo Annotated Texas Penal **oode,** prolrldeIr a penalty for paoeing rea ll$bt trafiio ~#lgnala on State hlgbwayr outoide thenlfgtta of incorporated oities andtome.. You do not State,whether or not Bufialo ir an inoorporated olty or **towni** fi the tom or city ‘was not fnoorporated then mob oanes would be proper; if ineorporated, the oity or town ors$inancres, if any, would oontrol, andthe oorpomtion court ‘andnot the juatloe oourt ,vMd have jurisdlotlon 

## 0r the 

## 0,rr~se.

rent up Wedonot baoe euffieient information to eomon other mattere&ated in the report. inquiry Ti-usting that thla eatisfaotorily amwere your ', we are Vergtrulg yours +WNWEYGYBJmALOFTEXAS

Wm.J. Faming Assistant
WJFzGO APPRCWECMAR 1, 1941

h*- ATTORNEY GEERAL Or' TEXAS
#### FACTORS COMPANY, a Sole Proprietorship, Appellant, v. WASHBURN STORAGE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 4175.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

Oct. 24, 1963.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 14,1963.

*930Mauermann & Crites, San Antonio, for appellant.

Boyle, Wheeler, Gresham, Davis & Gregory, San Antonio, Elliott & Davis, Macon, Ga., for appellee.

WILSON, Justice.

Appellant, alleging it was assignee of a moving company, sued appellee for commissions alleged to be owed by the latter to the assignor. Appellant abandoned its action on a sworn account. Appellee pleaded payment, and other defenses unnecessary to be noticed. The court instructed a verdict for appellee.

Appellant introduced in evidence a series of assignments from the moving company assignor which recited transfer to appellant of “Bill Numbers” corresponding to the numbers on attached bills of lading in stated amounts.

Appellant seeks to convince us the assignments were valid. This is not the problem. The proof failed to show any debt was due from appellee. Appellant proved, in effect, that it purchased accounts receivable. It showed only the assignment, but failed to raise any issue that assignor had an enforceable chose or interest therein subject to its disposition, or that the purported chose assigned constituted a cause of action against appellee. In the absence of such proof the court properly instructed a verdict. Briscoe v. Texas Gen. Ins. Agency, Tex.Civ.App., 60 S.W.2d 814; Warren v. Sigmond Rothschild Co., Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W. 1031; Jones v. Cunningham, Tex.Civ.App., 15 S.W. 38; 6 Tex.Jur.2d 452; 6 C.J. S. Assignments § 139, p. 1198; 6 Am.Jur.2d 315.

Affirmed.
FILED

March 17, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

WESTERN SECTION AT JACKSON

CYNTHIA A. PHILLIPS, PAUL )

PHILLIPS, JUDY WEBB, and )

GLENN WEBB, )

)

Plaintiffs/Appellees, ) Dyer Circuit No. 93-137 & 93-144

)

VS. ) Appeal No. 02A01-9704-CV-00094

)

FRANCIS PEROT, )

)

Defendant/Appellant, )

)

and )

)

KELLY L. PHILLIPS, by and through )

her legal guardian and parent, )

TERESA THURMAN, and TERESA )

THURMAN, Individually, )

)

Plaintiffs/Appellees, )

)

VS. )

)

FRANCIS CERIAC PEROT, )

)

Defendant/Appellant. )

CONCURRING OPINION

While I concur with the opinion of the majority of the Court in this case, I

respectfully submit that there is a lack of uniformity and certainty in the cases which

discuss the proper ratio of additurs or remittiturs to jury verdicts. [e.g. Foster v. Amcon

International Inc., 621S.W.2d 142 (Tenn. 1981); Guess v. Morrey, 726 S.W.2d 906

(Tenn.App. 1986); Anderson v. Latham Trucking Co., 728 S.W.2d 752 (Tenn. 1987)]. 

Perhaps the best way to reconcile this case with other similar cases is to place the

emphasis on determining whether or not the additur or remittitur would result in an

award not only proportionally different from the jury verdict but also substantially

different in absolute terms. That is to say, verdicts of relatively small amounts of money

might be granted additurs or remittiturs of greater percentages than verdicts of relatively

large amounts. The verdicts in this case were modest, so that the additurs do not

substantially alter the end result.

CONCUR:

__________________________

Lanier, Sp. J.