alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
      13.1




ORIGIN
      AGRITECH LIMITED





Certification




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned, Gengchen Han, Chief Executive
      Officer of Origin Agritech Limited (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to his
      knowledge, that the Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended
      December 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
      that
      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




Date:
                February 15, 2007
            
            /s/
              Gengchen HanName:
                Gengchen Han
              Title:
                Chief Executive Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
      document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE   CONTAINS   SUMMARY   FINANACIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM
SOUTHWESTERN  BELL  TELEPHONE  COMPANY'S  QUARTERLY  REPORT  ON FORM 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>                                              
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                              73,000
<SECURITIES>                                             0     
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,668,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                        23,000
<INVENTORY>                                              0<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,232,000
<PP&E>                                          29,690,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,826,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  14,136,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,590,000
<BONDS>                                          4,168,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,023,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,136,000
<SALES>                                                  0<F2>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,535,000
<CGS>                                                    0<F3>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      938,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   462,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    23,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  84,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    626,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                       231,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                395,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       395,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
<FN> 
<F1> THIS AMOUNT IS IMMATERIAL.
<F2> NET SALES OF  TANGIBLE  PRODUCTS  IS NOT MORE THAN 10% OF TOTAL  OPERATING
     REVENUES AND  THEREFORE  HAS NOT BEEN STATED  SEPARATELY  IN THE FINANCIAL
     STATEMENTS  PURSUANT  TO  REGULATION  S-X,  RULE  5-03(B).  THIS AMOUNT IS
     INCLUDED IN THE "TOTAL REVENUES" TAG.
<F3> COST OF TANGIBLE  GOODS SOLD IS INCLUDED IN COST OF SERVICES  AND PRODUCTS
     IN  THE  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  AND  THE  "TOTAL-COST"  TAG,  PURSUANT  TO
     REGULATION S-X,RULE 5-03(B).
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 5496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2587]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1072]


Grant of Authority for Subzone Status, Alfa Laval Distribution, 
Inc., (Separator and Decanter Centrifuge Equipment/Parts), 
Indianapolis, IN

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

    Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act provides for `` * * * the 
establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the 
United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for 
other purposes,'' and authorizes the Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant 
to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade 
zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;
    Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR part 400) provide for the 
establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities 
cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results 
in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest;
     Whereas, the Indianapolis Airport Authority, grantee of Foreign-
Trade Zone 72, has made application to the Board for authority to 
establish special-purpose subzone status at the separator and decanter 
centrifuge equipment parts warehousing/distribution (non-manufacturing) 
facility of Alfa Laval Distribution, Inc., located in Indianapolis, 
Indiana (FTZ Docket 50-98, filed November 5, 1998);
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment has been given in the 
Federal Register (63 FR 63451, November 13, 1998); and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application 
is in the public interest;
    Now, Therefore, the Board hereby grants authority for subzone 
status at the separator and decanter centrifuge equipment parts 
warehousing/distribution facility of Alfa Laval Distribution, Inc., 
located in Indianapolis, Indiana (Subzone 72N), at the location 
described in the application, and subject to the FTZ Act and the 
Board's regulations, including Sec. 400.28. The scope of authority does 
not include activity conducted under FTZ procedures that would result 
in a change in tariff classification.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of January 2000 .
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Attest:
Dennis Puccinelli, 
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-2587 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
cv-00571-OLG Document 88 Filed 11/30/22 P
-cv-00571-OLG Document 88 Filed 11/30/22 P
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 191 (Monday, October 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 58766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25114]



[[Page 58766]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-3674-000]


Virginia Electric and Power Company; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on September 14, 2000, Virginia Electric and Power 
Company (Virginia Power or the Company) tendered for filing the 
following:
    1. Service Agreement for Firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service 
by Virginia Electric and Power Company to Virginia Electric Marketing 
LLC designated as Service Agreement No. 297 under the Company's FERC 
Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 5;
    2. Service Agreement for Non-Firm Point-to-Point Transmission 
Service by Virginia Electric and Power Company to Virginia Electric 
Marketing LLC designated as Service Agreement No. 298 under the 
Company's FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 5.
    The foregoing Service Agreements are tendered for filing under the 
Open Access Transmission Tariff to Eligible Purchasers effective June 
7, 2000. Under the tendered Service Agreements, Virginia Power will 
provide point-to-point service to Virginia Electric Marketing LLC under 
the rates, terms and conditions of the Open Access Transmission Tariff.
    Virginia Power requests an effective date of September 14, 2000, 
the date of filing of the Service Agreements.
    Copies of the filing were served upon Virginia Electric Marketing 
LLC, the Virginia State Corporation Commission, and the North Carolina 
Utilities Commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commissions's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
and protests should be filed on or before October 5, 2000. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may 
also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.red.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-25114 Filed 9-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25898]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Catalytica Advanced Technologies

    Notice is hereby given that, on July 24, 2000, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Catalytica Advanced Technologies 
has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities 
of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the 
Act, the identities of the parties are Catalytica Advanced 
Technologies, Inc., Mountain View, CA; and Argonaut Technologies, Inc., 
San Carlos, CA. The nature and objectives of the venture are to conduct 
research on the discovery and development of emission control catalysts 
for lean burn engines using a novel, rapid Catalyst Development Engine. 
The activities of this Joint Venture project will be partially funded 
by an award from the Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 00-25898 Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
A N ' - cr 

fl.i Certified Mail Fee /. Extra Services & Fees (check box, add fee as appropriate) 

0 Return Receipt Qrordcopy) $ 0 Return Receipt (eiectronic) _______________ $___________ stmark & 0 Certified Mat Restricted Deivery $ I'' Here 'o 0 DAduaflignatureRequired $ ____________ o Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $ ______________ 0 / Postage 

Franco Jr. TotaiPostageandFi Antonio 

$___________ Assistant U.SL Attorney 

Sent To Asset Forfeiti4re section 

0 601 NW. Loop 41f0, Suite 600 N 

San Antonio, City, State, ZIP+4lt 

DR-20-CV-36 doc.# 3 & 4 

Case 2:20-cv-00036-AM Document 6 Filed 05/28/20 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 12


UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY AND CONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

     COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                        (Unaudited)
       
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Three Months Ended March 31,
                                       ----------------------------
Millions of Dollars Except Ratios            1999          1998
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                          <C>           <C>
Earnings:
 Net Income (Loss)...................        $149          $(32)
 Undistributed equity earnings.......         (10)           (9)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 Total...............................         139           (41)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Income Taxes.........................          82           (31)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges:
 Interest expense including 
   amortization  of debt  discount...         156           134
 Portion of rentals representing  
   an interest factor................          44            43
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 Total...............................         200           177
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings Available for Fixed Charges.         421           105
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges -- as above............        $200          $177
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ratio of earnings to fixed 
   charges (Note  7).................         2.1           0.6
-------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. DONALD W. MORGAN, Appellant. No. 80030

- 2

- I

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

P ER C URIAM
— The State charged Donald Morgan with two counts of first degree theft and two counts of second degree theft relating to his commission of insurance fraud. As part of a plea agreement, the State agreed to dismiss all but one count of first degree theft, and Morgan agreed to pay restitution on the dismissed charges. The State and Morgan agreed to the sum of restitution for the second degree thefts, but disputed the sum of restitution for the first degree thefts. Both the State and Morgan presented physical evidence, including bank statements, at a restitution hearing. Morgan first contends he was denied due process because the trial court did not allow him to confront and cross

- examine adverse witnesses. But we have already rejected the a rgument that the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses applies to restitution hearings. State v. Fambrough , 66 Wn. App. 223,
226

- 27, 831 P.2d 789 (1992). And Morgan’s reliance on Morrissey v. Brewer , 408 U.S. 471, 481, 92 S. Ct. 2593, 33 L. Ed

. 2d 484 (1972), which involved due process at parole revocation hearings, is misplaced because restitution hearings do not involve the potential loss of a liberty interest.No. 80030

- 2

- I/ 2 Morgan furthermore argues that both the Sixth Amendment and article I,
section 21 of the Washington State Constitution require a jury determination of the facts necessary to set a restitution amount. But this claim has been rejected by the Washington Supreme Court in State v. Kinneman , 155 Wn.2d 272, 285, 119 P.3d 350 (2005). Though M organ contends that Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. 99, 133 S. Ct. 2151, 186 L. Ed. 2d 314 (2013), has eroded the reasoning of Kinneman , Alleyne held only that a fact that increases the mandatory minimum penalty for a crime is an element that must be su bmitted to the jury. Restitution does not involve a mandatory maximum or minimum penalty and Alleyne is not implicated here. Morgan’s citation to Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp. , 112 Wn.2d 636, 648, 771 P.2d 711, 780 P.2d 260 (1989) is similarly uncompelling b ecause Sofie was a civil case in which the court concluded that a statute placing a limit on noneconomic damages was unconstitutional, because it interfered with the jury's traditional function to determine damages. Morgan provides no analysis of why Sofi e applies in a criminal setting to the determination of restitution. Affirmed. FOR THE COURT:
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Special Emphasis Panel on Research, Evaluation and Communication (1210).                    

*Date and Time:*                         October 23, 2000 (8 a.m.-6 p.m.); October 24, 2000 (8 a.m.-3 p.m.).                    

*Place:*                         National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Closed.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Elizabeth VanderPutten, Program Director; Faculty Early Career Development Program of the Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication (REC), Room 855, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone: 703/292-8650.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate formal proposals submitted to the CAREER Program as a part of the selection process for awards.                    

*Reason for Closing:*                         The proposals being reviewed include information of a propriety or confidential nature, including technical information, financial data, such as salaries, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.                    

Dated: October 3, 2000.

Karen J. York,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-25828  Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

JONATHAN VILLAREAL, §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § CAUSE NO: SA-20-CV-0571-OLG

§

JOHN SAENZ, MIGUEL VILLAREAL, JR., §

GUNN, LEE & CAVE, P.C., §

Defendants. § 

AMENDED REFERRAL ORDER

On this date came on to be considered the status of the above-styled and numbered cause. 

On August 24, 2020, the instant action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Richard B. 

Farrer for disposition of all pretrial matters, with certain exceptions, including Motions for 

Temporary Restraining Orders and Preliminary Injunctions. See docket no. 22. The original 

Referral Order stated that if appropriate, those matters “shall be referred by separate order of this 

Court.” See id. 

Having reviewed the status of the case and Plaintiff’s First Amended Application for 

Seizure, Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Permanent Injunctive Relief 

(docket no. 29-3) (the “Motion for TRO and Injunctive Relief” or “Motion”), the Court finds that 

it is appropriate to refer consideration of those matters to Magistrate Judge Farrer as well. 

Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Court’s prior Referral Order, Plaintiff’s 

Motion for TRO and Injunctive Relief (docket no. 29-3) and all associated and/or attached

FILED

DEPUTY 

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

BY: ________________________________ January 19, 2021

 JU

Case 5:20-cv-00571-OLG Document 36 Filed 01/19/21 Page 1 of 2
filings1

are hereby REFERRED to United States Magistrate Judge Richard B. Farrer for 

consideration. 

It if further ORDERED that the Court’s prior Referral Order (docket no. 22) shall 

otherwise remain in effect with respect to all other matters in this case. 

It is so ORDERED.

Signed this _____ day of January, 2021.

 

 

 ORLANDO L. GARCIA

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 The Court notes that the Motion for TRO and Injunctive Relief is presently filed as an 

attachment to a Motion for Leave to File Sealed Document. It is the Court’s understanding that 

the Motion for TRO and Injunctive Relief will be given its own docket number, and thus, this 

Order shall be construed as referring the substantive consideration of those matters irrespective 

of whether they are docketed as docket no. 29-3 or a separate item. 

19th

Case 5:20-cv-00571-OLG Document 36 Filed 01/19/21 Page 2 of 2
Ex 10.9 BIFS Technologies Corp.





Exhibit 10.9


                                     FORM OF
                                    AGREEMENT
                        BETWEEN HARDING ASSET FUNDS, INC.
                         AND BIOFILTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.
                                   TO PURCHASE
                           REMAINING 625,000 SHARES OF
                                A 504-D OFFERING

On March 31, 1999, Biofiltration Systems, Inc. (BIFS) agreed to sell 875,000
shares of its common stock to an entity called The Baldridge Group. The stock
was sold on a conditional sales contract. Baldridge brought in other partners to
purchase some of the stock. On September 1, 1999 BIFS was de-listed from the OTC
BB. Baldridge decided at that time not to continue purchasing the stock as
agreed and defaulted on the contract. BIFS notified Baldridge of the default and
gave the required ten-day notice.

Since the Baldridge default BIFS contacted some of the original Partners and
they indicated an interest in purchasing the remaining 625,000 shares to
complete the purchase and close out the 504-D.

Because of its Principals earlier involvement in purchasing stock in the 504-D,
BIFS agreed to allow Harding Asset Funds, Inc. "HAFI" and its Principals the
opportunity to purchase the remaining 625,000 shares for a reduced price because
BIFS is presently not listed on the OTC BB.

HAFI agreed to purchase, and BIFS agreed to sell the remaining 625,000 shares
for $0.50 per share.

The terms are as follows: Ten (10) equal payments of $30,000.00 each and one
payment of $12,500.00 BIFS will deliver to HAFI the stock in increments of ten
(10) 60,000 free trading share certificates upon payment to BIFS of $30,000.00
each. HAFI agrees to purchase a minimum of 60,000 shares each month for ten (10)
months and 25,000 shares on the final month. The first 60,000 shares shall be
delivered to HAFI and $30,000.00 paid to BIFS upon execution of this agreement
by both parties.

If purchaser does not make the requires payments as agreed, this agreement may
be cancelled by either party upon a ten (10) day written notice to the
defaulting party.

By execution of this agreement, both parties agree to all terms and conditions
as written above.

HARDING ASSET FUNDS, INC.                   BIOFILTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.

By: /s/ Roy Meadows                         By:/s/ Alpha Keyser
Its President                               Its President & CEO

Date: March 4, 2000                         Date: March 4, 2000