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

‘•.‘ 45OO4456841OIO7..’..,.-

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA INVOIcENO

STD—521 REV. 12.88

PUBLICATIONSAUTHORIZATION AND INVOICE 154637

PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION (To be completed by agency):

TO: ME AN ADDRESS OF NEW APER) , FED L I. 0. j FRM: C E AND ORE OF AGENCY) V LERWhbO, Ile ‘atriot 4ews Co . zveke f. ?touse :fl—ioi—9495

P.O. Box 2265 Bureau of Air Qualityflarrisburg, pA 17105—2265 400 Market St. 12th Floor

AttN: Lori ‘. Rarrisburg, PA 17105

HEREWITH IS ENCLOSED COPY FOR PUBUCADON OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROPOSALS TO TYPE OF AD

U EMPLOY PURCHASE CONTRACT SELL CLASSIFIED LEGAl.. NOTICE

PUBUSH ADVERTISEMENT (NO. OF TIMES) MAXIMUM NO, OF LINES DATE ORDER NO,

I October 15, 2009

DATES OF INSERTiON - SIGNATURE FOR AGENY •‘ .

October roo9. Wednesday edition - I

You, as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subject to the terms of this order, as

follows: Advertisement to be published in regular advertising columns, no position specified; caption of two lines and signatureto be in capitals and subject matter and title of officer to be set solid in type regularly used by_your newspaper for public (legal)

notice advertising; charge to be made at the rate charged to and paid by commercial advertisers for matter similarly set and

occupying similar space; advertisement to be run in the editions specified above. Vendor agrees that, in the performance of anycontract awarded to it hereunder, said vendor will not discriminate against any employe or other persons on account of race, color,sex, religious creed, ancestry, age or national origin and that the Commonwealth, upon receipt of satisfactory evidence of suchdiscrimination, shall have the right to cancel said contract. Return this copy at once if you will not accept this advertisement underthe terms

set forth.

Proof of advertising in the form of a tearsheet must be included on Parts 1,2 & 3. Return original and two copies (signed

by the editor or publisher) to Agency listed above. Part 1 must be notarized, Part 4 is yours.

Commonwealth to be billed only for actual number of printed lines published.

PASTE TEARSHEET HERE

CommweaIth o Pennsylvania

County of

_____________________________

Before me, tile subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said Cou ty, onalycame

who being çfly’worn,dothdepose and say that he is PZ?.hs_4.Zt r.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,167,472
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       2,012,794
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 13,714,184
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         757,094
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           757,000
<LOANS>                                    170,106,521
<ALLOWANCE>                                (1,148,221)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             190,313,913
<DEPOSITS>                                  96,969,355
<SHORT-TERM>                                40,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,008,384
<LONG-TERM>                                 25,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,821
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,320,353
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             190,319,913
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              9,606,664
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              697,489
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               138,031
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            10,442,184
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,252,568
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,758,696
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,683,488
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  175,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,286,439
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,639,933
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,601,771
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,601,771
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.94
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.66
<LOANS-NON>                                    328,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                416,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                           (1,027,300)
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   79,725
<RECOVERIES>                                  (25,146)
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                          (1,148,221)
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                       (1,096,421)
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                       (52,000)
        

</TABLE>
1

Subject: Conference call with Portland Cement Association

Location: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC

Date: November 28, 2012

Participants:

Portland Cement Association (PCA)

Andy O’Hare, PCA

Curtis Lesslie, Ash Grove

Satish Sheth, CEMEX

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Sharon Nizich

Stef Johnson

Debra Dalcher

David Solomon

Steven Silverman (by telephone)

RTI International

Mike Laney

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the definition of startup and shutdown. PCA stated 

that the current definitions for start-up and shutdown needs to be revised to include when the 

periods of start-up and shutdown end. They made the following points:

They agree that startup begins with the starting of the ID fan and combustion.

Startup and shutdown are infrequent and typically for short periods of time.

Recommend defining the end of startup as after 120 minutes of continuous feed or when the feed 

rate exceeds 60 percent of the kiln’s design capacity.

Gas flow will be erratic as long as kiln is not in normal mode. 

Takes 36-48 hours before feed can be added to get to the necessary normal operating 

temperatures.

Feed is ramped up gradually, not added erratically (start and stop).

Unless there is a mechanical problem, kilns are not suddenly stopped.

Each kiln is different – starting feed rate is different for different kiln types. Usually start at 25 

percent and ramp up to 60 percent of capacity. At 60 percent, kiln is fairly stable.

After crash stop (due to mechanical problem), startup depends on problem. If work in kiln 

required, kiln must be cold. If exterior issue, kiln not stopped. Fuel/feed scaled back, kiln rotated 
2

slowly. Try to maintain temperature in kiln. For longer shutdowns, fuel may be completely 

stopped.

For 6-8 breakdown, can take 8-10 hrs to get back to 60 percent production. Feed must be ramped 

up so as to maintain steady temperature. 

Shutdown begins when continuous feed is stopped.

Shutdown may not be a continuous event.
Exhibit


Exhibit 10.1




FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This First Amendment (“First Amendment”), effective as of September 9, 2015, by and between Acceleron Pharma Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Acceleron”), and Steven D. Ertel, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Acceleron (the “Executive”), amends that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between Executive and Acceleron, dated as of January 31, 2014 (“Agreement”).  Together Acceleron and Executive are the “Parties” and each is a “Party”.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 12 of the Agreement, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement.


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:


		
	1.
	In the first sentence of each of Sections 5(d)(i) and 5(d)(ii) of the Agreement, the text “the second anniversary of the Amendment Date” in each Section is hereby deleted and replaced with the text “September 9, 2015”.




		
	2.
	In Section 5(a)(i)(B) of the Agreement, the text “six months” is hereby deleted and replaced with the text “nine months”.




		
	3.
	All other terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto by their duly authorized representatives have executed this First Amendment effective as of the date first above written.


ACCELERON PHARMA INC.


By:    /s/ John L. Knopf, Ph.D.        
John L. Knopf, Ph.D.
Chief Executive Officer and President


By:    /s/ Joseph Zakrzewski        
Joseph Zakrzewski
Compensation Committee Chair


ACCEPTED AND AGREED:


Signature:     /s/ Steven D. Ertel        
Steven D. Ertel


Date:        September 9, 2015
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 17, 2017.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 17, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17I0210. MARTIN ANDRES DE JESUS v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

16DR0140
#### JONES v. STATE.

No. 22065.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 8, 1942.

Earl Shelton, of Austin, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*960'KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is - assault with intent to murder. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of three years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment and all matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
Case 4:22-cv-00825-P Document 5-19 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 247
#### JOHNSON v. WERBNER.

No. 10955.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

March 26, 1941.

Hoyo, Sharpe & Williams and E. C. Overall, all of San Antonio, for appellant.

Bennett & Klein and Moursund, Ball, Moursund & Bergstron, all of San Antonio, for appellee.

SMITH, Chief Justice.

Appellant has filed a motion in this court for leave to file a supplemental transcript from the court below, embracing appellant’s “objections to statement of facts prepared by the trial court” and “additional statement of facts prepared by the plaintiff,” together with “Bill of Costs” incurred in filing and incorporating said papers into the supplemental transcript. Both those papers are ex parte, being signed by counsel for’ plaintiff alone. Neither of them shows approval by counsel for appellee or by the trial judge, who expressly disapproved both of them.

 This court has no power to amend or supplement or change the statement of facts approved, signed and ordered filed,, as a part of the record below, by the trial court. Nor has it the power to consider any other purported statement of facts not approved nor ordered filed by the trial judge, as a part of the record below. Wherefore, the two papers included in the statement of facts now tendered here by appellant are not properly a part of the record and the motion for leave to file supplemental transcript thereof will be denied. 3 Tex.Jur. §§ 542, 546, 551; Alexander v. Fullwood, Tex.Civ.App., 143 S.W.2d 646; Cox v. Thompson, Tex.Civ.App., 82 S.W. 672.

Motion denied, and costs thereof in this and the trial court will be assessed against appellant.
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 147 Filed 10/26/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 406
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 147 Filed 10/26/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 407
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 53 Filed 09/28/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 175
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 53 Filed 09/28/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 176
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Barry Beckford, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert G. Seewald, J.), rendered April 28, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of *316*to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was observed inside the laundry room of 3824 Bronx Boulevard breaking the coin box of one of the washing machines and trying to pry open another. Recovered from defendant were 30 quarters and a broken-tipped knife.

*299Defendant contends that the People on summation made burden-shifting and burden-diminishing remarks, mischaracterized and denigrated the defense, and improperly referred to defendant as a convicted felon. These comments were either harmless error, responsive to defendant’s summation, or adequately cured by the court’s instructions.

Furthermore, in view of defendant’s prior felony conviction and the probation report’s comment that his "outlook” was extremely poor, it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to sentence defendant to 3 1⁄2 to 7 years. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Kassal, JJ.
333 Exemption Checklist

• Operator’s name and address:

Bruno Doria of Worklight Pictures, LLC

147 10th Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70124

• The specific applicable regulations from which relief is required (CFRs);

Weight (including battery and propellers)

1280 g

Diagonal size (including propellers)

590 mm

Max Speed

16 m/s (ATTI mode, no wind)

Max Ascent Speed

5 m/s

Max Descent Speed

3 m/s

Limited operating area associated with the aircraft and its operation:

Would not be used on closed-set motion pictures or closed-set television filming, 

or used for capturing invasive footage of prohibited properties.

• How the operator will maintain an equivalent level of safety or no adverse impact to 

safety;

Maintain: Will maintain by adhering to manufacturer updates and required safety measures. 

Adverse impact: The DJI Phantom is unmanned and is unable to carry passengers and/or crew. 

• How granting the exemption would be in the public interest;

Available stock footage for independent and corporate companies, etc.

• The proposed operations; and,

Aerial data collection; Aerial video and photography for corporate videography, real estate 

photography and videography, special events, documentaries, television production, and 

landscape 

• The make and model of the aircraft for proposed operations (aircraft manuals are not 

necessary).

UAS proposed DJI Phantom Professional 3
EXHIBIT 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Ever-Glory International Group, Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending September 30, 2006, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Kang Yihua, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 
By:  /s/ Kang Yihua Kang Yihua Chief Executive Officer 
 

 

November 29, 2006
# C_2020259EN.01000101.xml

| 7.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 259/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 259/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

6 August 2020

(2020/C 259/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1843 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 124,96 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4500 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,90033 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,3165 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0759 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 160,20 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,6538 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,202 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 346,23 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,4073 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,8360 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 8,5853 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6492 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5748 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,1786 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7828 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6236 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 404,99 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 20,7655 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,2325 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4680 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 17 304,00 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9604 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,136 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 86,9321 |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,832 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,3340 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 26,6150 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 88,7650 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1843

JPY

Japanese yen

124,96

DKK

Danish krone

7,4500

GBP

Pound sterling

0,90033

SEK

Swedish krona

10,3165

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0759

ISK

Iceland króna

160,20

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,6538

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,202

HUF

Hungarian forint

346,23

PLN

Polish zloty

4,4073

RON

Romanian leu

4,8360

TRY

Turkish lira

8,5853

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6492

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5748

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,1786

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7828

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6236

KRW

South Korean won

1 404,99

ZAR

South African rand

20,7655

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,2325

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4680

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

17 304,00

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9604

PHP

Philippine peso

58,136

RUB

Russian rouble

86,9321

THB

Thai baht

36,832

BRL

Brazilian real

6,3340

MXN

Mexican peso

26,6150

INR

Indian rupee

88,7650

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1



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 on Form 10-K of Cue Biopharma,
Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), we, Daniel R. Passeri, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Gary Schuman, Interim
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to our knowledge that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Cue Biopharma, Inc. and will be retained by Cue Biopharma, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|/s/ Daniel R. Passeri          |  | /s/ Gary Schuman                                              
|------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|Name: Daniel R. Passeri        |  | Name: Gary Schuman                                            
|Title: Chief Executive Officer |  | Title: Interim Chief Financial Officer                        
|(Principal Executive Officer)  |  | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|                               |  |                                                               
|Date: March 29, 2018           |  | Date: March 29, 2018
#### LABANSAT et al. v. CAMERON COUNTY et al.

Motion No. 14032.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Aug. 28, 1940.

H. B. Galbraith, of Brownsville, for plaintiffs.

J. T. Canales, C. S. Eidman, Jr., J. W. Wiech, Wm. Scanlan, and A. K. Black, all of Brownsville, for defendants.

SMITH, Chief Justice.

Cameron County and others, as defendants, recovered judgment against Ana Lab-ansat and others, as plaintiffs, in the district court of the 103rd district of Cameron County. The judgment was rendered at a term of court which could not by law, and did not in fact, continue in session more than eight weeks. The plaintiffs filed a motion for new trial which was overruled on the day the term ended, to-wit: June 8, 1940, but plaintiffs did not file their appeal bond until 21 days thereafter, on to-.wit: June 29, 1940.

Thereafter, on August 6, plaintiffs tendered the record in the case for filing in this court, but the clerk refused to file the same, for the stated reason that it appeared therefrom that the appeal bond was filed one day too late. Plaintiffs thereupon, on August 10, filed their motion for leave to file the record and prosecute an appeal in this court. Plaintiffs concede that the appeal bond was filed one day after the expiration of the time prescribed by statutes for such filing. Art. 2253, R.S.1925, as amended, Act 1927,. 40th Legislature, p. 21, Ch. 15, § 1, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. art. 2253.

Although it may be conceded that mov-ants set up reasons for the delayed filing of the appeal bond which would ordinarily justify exercise of discretion in aid of the right of appeal, yet the motion must nevertheless be denifed, because no discretion is lodged in this court to 'excuse a delay, even though of only one day, in filing appeal bonds below. For “The decisions are numerous and uniform tp the effect that if an appeal bond is not filed within the time prescribed the Court of Civil Appeals acquires no jurisdiction, and is without power to acquire it.” 3 Tex.Jur. § 227; El Paso & N. E. R. Co. v. Whatley, 99 Tex. 128, 87 S.W. 819.

Motion denied.