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


<ARTICLE>                                           7
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                Jan-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  Jun-30-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            671,968
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                            34,495
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                              35,540
<EQUITIES>                                       42,628
<MORTGAGE>                                            0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                         0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  749,091
<CASH>                                           26,325
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               23,206
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           24,251
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                1,467,631
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 834,011
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             117,035
<POLICY-OTHER>                                        0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                 0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 108,178
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                      289,429
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  1,467,631
<PREMIUMS>                                      109,173
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              24,029
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   60 
<OTHER-INCOME>                                    8,710
<BENEFITS>                                       65,838
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      29,584
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             10,280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  22,645
<INCOME-TAX>                                      6,891
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              15,754
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     16,638
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                        0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                   0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                     0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                      0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                       0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                               0
        


</TABLE>
#### AMERICAN SURETY CO. OF NEW YORK v. M-B ISE KREAM CO.

No. 1397-6017.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.

Nov. 28, 1933.

*288R. L. Stennis and Lee *G.*Carter, both of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.

Nathaniel Jacks, McCormick, Bromberg, Leftwieh & Carrington, Martin B. Winfrey, D. A. Frank, and Bartlett, Brown & Thornton, all of Dallas, for defendant in error.

SHORT, Presiding Judge.

 The opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals is reported in 38 S.W.(2d) 118 et seq. Under the facts found by the Court of Civil Appeals, we think the opinion of that court is correct, and approve .same. The plaintiff in error having paid the debt of the Crystal Ice Company, by virtue of the fact that it signed the bond to that effect, was subrogated to all the rights of the United States government. However, it occupied only the position which the government would have occupied had not the plaintiff in error paid the debt due the government. Section 115 of title 26 of the U. S. Code Annotated, quoted in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals, designated the manner in which a lien shall be fixed so as to make liable for the debt of the seller any purchaser of the property. The provisions of this law were not followed, and the consequence is the government lost its lien as against the property of the Crystal Ice Company, in the hands of the defendant in error, who is shown to have been a purchaser for value without notice. This is the principal contention of the plaintiff in error.

There is another contention by it, to the effect that the transaction between the parties comes within the purview of the Bulk Sales Law, article 4001, R. S. 1925. The opinion cites several eases and also Corpus Juris, to the effect that materials and ingredients ' used by a manufacturer fob the manufacture of an article different from any of the ingredients does not constitute merchandise, and therefore is not within the meaning of the Bulk Sales Law.

We recommend that the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals affirming that of the district court be affirmed.

CURETON, Chief Justice.

The judgments of the district court and Court of Civil .Appeals are both affirmed, as recommended by the Commission of Appeals.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: FACEBOOK PRIVACY

LITIGATION,

MIKE ROBERTSON, as representative of

the class,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware

corporation,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 12-15619

D.C. No. 5:10-cv-02389-JW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

James Ware, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted January 17, 2014

San Francisco, California

Before: ALARCÓN, TALLMAN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

FILED

MAY 08 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of their state

law claims for breach of contract and fraud, as well as their claims under

California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumer Legal Remedies Act

(CLRA). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.1

Plaintiffs allege that the information disclosed by Facebook can be used to

obtain personal information about plaintiffs, and that they were harmed both by the

dissemination of their personal information and by losing the sales value of that

information. In the absence of any applicable contravening state law, these

allegations are sufficient to show the element of damages for their breach of

contract and fraud claims. Cf. Gautier v. Gen. Tel. Co., 44 Cal. Rptr. 404, 406

(Cal. Ct. App. 1965) (holding that breach of contract requires damage to the

plaintiff); Lazar v. Sup. Ct., 909 P.2d 981, 984 (Cal. 1996) (stating that fraud

requires damage to the plaintiff). Therefore, the district court erred in dismissing

these state law claims.

We affirm the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ UCL claim because

plaintiffs failed to allege that they “lost money or property as a result of the unfair

competition.” Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204; see also Folgelstrom v. Lamps

1

In a published opinion filed concurrently with this memorandum, we affirm

the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims under the Stored Communications

Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2702. Robertson v. Facebook, ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. 2014). 

2
Plus, Inc., 125 Cal. Rtpr. 3d 260, 266–67 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011). We also affirm the

district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claim under the CLRA because plaintiffs

failed to allege that they obtained anything from Facebook “by purchase,” or by a

“consumer transaction.” Schauer v. Mandarin Gems of Cal., Inc., 23 Cal. Rptr.

233, 241 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005); Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1761(d), 1780(a).

Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal. 

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. 

3
#### HALL v. STATE.

No. 17452.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 27, 1935.

Shead & Smith, of Longview, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The indictment under which appellant was tried charged the offense of burglary of a private residence and contained averments showing that appellant had been previously convicted of several offenses of like character. Because of repetition of offenses, the penalty assessed was imprisonment in the penitentiary for life.

The testimony adduced by the state was, in substance, as follows: At 4 a. m., May 22, 1934, appellant entered the private residence of D. O. Lawrence. Mr. Lawrence had gone to his bakery, which was nearby. His wife, who was asleep in the residence, was aroused when appellant entered. He opened the door to her room very slowly and turned on the flash-light he was carrying. She asked him what he wanted, and he replied that he was looking for some one. She then called to her husband, and, as appellant left the house, Mr. Lawrence apprehended him. He found in appellant’s possession a flash-light, pocketknife, pass-key, and fifteen cents in money. Appellant had theretofore been convicted on several occasions of the offense of burglary.

Appellant did not testify in his own behalf. He introduced a physician who testified that appellant’s vision .was poor.

No bills of exception are brought forward.

The evidence is deemed sufficient to support the judgment of conviction.

The judgment and sentence recite that appellant is condemned to confinement in the penitentiary for not less than five years nor *76more *than*life. They are reformed in order that it may be shown that appellant is condemned to confinement in the penitentiary for life.

As ■ reformed, 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.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 140 

To withhold certain highway funds if a State does not comply with certain 

requirements in issuing a driver’s license or identification card, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Mr. GALLEGLY (for himself, Mr. BILBRAY, and Mr. BARTLETT) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To withhold certain highway funds if a State does not comply 

with certain requirements in issuing a driver’s license 

or identification card, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WITHHOLD HIGHWAYS FUNDS IN CERTAIN 

4 CASES. 

5 (a) PERCENTAGE FOR CERTAIN CALENDAR

6 YEARS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if 

7 a State does not comply with the requirements of section 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 140 IH

1 202 of title II of Division B of Public Law 109–13 (49 

2 U.S.C. 30301 note), the Secretary shall withhold a per3 centage of the amount to be apportioned for Federal-aid 

4 highways under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of 

5 section 104(b) of title 23, United States Code, for the fol6 lowing calendar years: 

7 (1) CALENDAR YEAR 2010.—For calendar year 

8 2010, 2 percent. 

9 (2) CALENDAR YEAR 2011.—For calendar year 

10 2011, 4 percent. 

11 (3) CALENDAR YEAR 2012.—For calendar year 

12 2012, 6 percent. 

13 (4) CALENDAR YEAR 2013 AND EACH CALENDAR

14 YEAR THEREAFTER.—For calendar year 2013 and 

15 in each calendar year thereafter, 8 percent. 

16 (b) APPORTIONED FUNDS.—If, within 4 years after 

17 the date the apportionment for any State is reduced in 

18 accordance with this section, the Secretary determines 

19 that such State has complied with the requirements of sec20 tion 202 of title II of Division B of Public Law 109–13 

21 (49 U.S.C. 30301 note), the Secretary shall apportion to 

22 such State an increase in an amount equal to such reduc23 tion. If at the end of such 4-year period, any State has 

24 not complied with such requirements, any amounts so 

25 withheld shall lapse. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•HR 140 IH

1 SEC. 2. REAL ID AMENDMENT. 

2 Section 202(d) of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (49 

3 U.S.C. 30301 note) is amended— 

4 (1) by striking paragraph (11); and 

5 (2) redesignating paragraphs (12) and (13) as 

6 paragraphs (11) and (12), respectively. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2302 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain Bureau of Land 

Management land in Cache County, Utah, to the city of Hyde Park, 

Utah, for public purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 11, 2018 

Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. LEE) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain 

Bureau of Land Management land in Cache County, 

Utah, to the city of Hyde Park, Utah, for public purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Hyde Park Land Con5 veyance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2302 IS

1 (1) CITY.—The term ‘‘City’’ means the city of 

2 Hyde Park, Utah. 

3 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

4 the Secretary of the Interior. 

5 SEC. 3. LAND CONVEYANCE, CITY OF HYDE PARK, UTAH. 

6 (a) CONVEYANCE REQUIRED.—Subject to valid exist7 ing rights, if not later than 90 days after the date of en8 actment of this Act, the City submits to the Secretary in 

9 writing a request for the conveyance of the Bureau of 

10 Land Management land described in subsection (b)(1) for 

11 public purposes, the Secretary shall convey to the City, 

12 without consideration and by patent, all right, title, and 

13 interest of the United States in and to the parcel of Bu14 reau of Land Management land described in subsection 

15 (b)(1) (including any improvements to the land). 

16 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.— 

17 (1) IN GENERAL.—The parcel of Bureau of 

18 Land Management land is the approximately 80-acre 

19 parcel generally depicted as ‘‘Proposed Land Con20 veyance Parcel’’ on the map entitled ‘‘Hyde Park 

21 Land Conveyance Act’’ and dated October 23, 2017. 

22 (2) MAP.— 

23 (A) AVAILABILITY.—The map described in 

24 paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2302 IS

1 public inspection in the appropriate office of the 

2 Bureau of Land Management. 

3 (B) CORRECTIONS.—The Secretary may 

4 correct minor errors in the map described in 

5 paragraph (1). 

6 (c) COSTS OF CONVEYANCE.—As a condition of the 

7 conveyance under subsection (a), all costs associated with 

8 the conveyance shall be paid by the City. 

9 (d) TIME FOR COMPLETION OF CONVEYANCE.—Not 

10 later than 1 year after the date on which the City submits 

11 the written request described in subsection (a), the Sec12 retary shall complete the conveyance under that sub13 section. 

14 (e) REVERSION.—If the land conveyed to the City 

15 under subsection (a) ceases to be used for a public pur16 pose, the land shall, at the discretion of the Secretary, re17 vert to the United States. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit No. 10.60




AMENDMENT TO NOTE




---

---

This Amendment to Note
(“Amendment”), made, delivered, and effective as of June ___, 2010, by and
between Advanced Photonix, Inc. (“Borrower”) and THE PRIVATEBANK AND TRUST
COMPANY (“Bank”).




WHEREAS, Borrower and Bank
are parties to that certain Promissory Note (Term Loan-Prime) in the original
principal amount of $1,735,716.61 dated September 25, 2008 (“Note”);
and




WHEREAS, Bank and Borrower
desire to amend the Note as set forth below;




NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the premises and the mutual promises contained in this
Amendment, Borrower and Bank agree as follows:




The definition of Applicable Margin is amended
to read as follows:


“‘Applicable Margin’ shall mean two
percent (2%).”




Borrower is responsible for all costs incurred
by Bank, including without limit reasonable attorney fees, with regard to the
preparation and execution of this Amendment.


The execution of this Amendment shall not be
deemed to be a waiver of any Default or Event of Default.


All the terms used in this Amendment which are
defined in the Note shall have the same meaning as used in the Note, unless
otherwise defined in this Amendment.


Borrower waives, discharges, and forever
releases Bank, Bank’s employees, officers, directors, attorneys, stockholders,
and their successors and assigns, from and of any and all claims, causes of
action, allegations or assertions that Borrower has or may have had at any time
up through and including the date of this Amendment, against any or all of the
foregoing, regardless of whether any such claims, causes of action, allegations
or assertions are known to Borrower or whether any such claims, causes of
action, allegations or assertions arose as result of Bank’s actions or omissions
in connection with the Note, or any amendments, extensions or modifications
thereto, or Bank’s administration of the debt evidenced by the Note or
otherwise.


This Amendment is not an agreement to any
further or other amendment of the Note.


Borrower expressly acknowledges and agrees
that except as expressly amended in this Amendment, the Note, as amended,
remains in full force and effect and is ratified, confirmed and
restated.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties have executed and delivered this Amendment on the date set forth
above.




THE PRIVATEBANK AND TRUST ADVANCED PHOTONIX,
INC.COMPANY




By:
            
            By:Its:
            
            Its:


79




---
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT 3.1(c)
                                --------------

             CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                         CHANGING NAME OF CORPORATION


                           (After issuance of Stock)




                       PROGRAM ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, INC.


                             A Nevada Corporation


We the undersigned, President and Assistant Secretary of Program Entertainment
Group, Inc. a Nevada Corporation do hereby certify:

That the Shareholders of said corporation, at a meeting duly convened and held
in Las Vegas, Nevada on July 22, 1997 are presented with a resolution whereby
the Board of Directors would amend the Articles of Incorporation to change the
name of the corporation. That a majority of the shareholders were represented at
the meeting of stockholders either in person or by proxy. That a majority of the
shareholders with voting rights at said meeting authorized the Board of
Directors to amend the Articles of Incorporation changing the name of the
corporation to Santa Maria Resources, Inc.:

That the Board of Directors of said corporation at a meeting duly convened, held
July 22, 1997, adopted a resolution to amend the original Articles of
Incorporation so that Article I of the Articles of Incorporation would delete
the phrase "The name of the corporation is Program Entertainment Group, Inc."
and insert the phrase "The name of the corporation is Santa Maria Resources,
Inc.":

Henceforth the name of the corporation shall be SANTA MARIA RESOURCES, INC.



___________________________________     ______________________________________
President                               Assistant Secretary

                                      32
<PAGE>

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

STATE OF NEVADA

COUNTY OF CLARK

On July 22, 1997 personally appeared before me, a Notary Public, Robert Sturges,
President and Alan H. Russell, Assistant Secretary of the Corporation, who
acknowledged they executed the above instrument on behalf of said Corporation.



                                                  ______________________________
                                                  NOTARY PUBLIC

                                      33
## F - 4



# Chippers

## F - 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 

### Temperature o

### CPercent Operation 2001 Cummins B3.3 85 BHP 

### Figure 1: Cecert 16 Exhaust Temperature Profile

Application: Chipper 

### Figure 2: Cecert 17 Exhaust Temperature Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 

### Temperature o 

### CPercent Operation 2000 Cummins B3.3 85BHP

## F - 6 Figure 3: Cecert 18 Exhaust Temperature Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 

### Temperature o

### CPercent Operation 2000 Cummins Model B3.3 85 BHP 

## Figure 4: Cecert 23 Exhaust Temperature Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 150 250 350 450 550 650 Temperature o 

### CPercent Operation "Perkins Model 866607 80 BHP

## F - 7 Figure 5: Cecert 24 Exhaust Temperature Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 150 250 350 450 550 

### Temperature o 

### CPercent Operation Perkins England 

### Figure 6: 2526069 Exhaust Temperatures Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 150 250 350 450 550 

### Temperature o 

### CPercent Operation "Perkins Model 4.236 80 BHP"

## F - 8 Figure 7: 2526822 Exhaust Temperatures Profile

Application: Chipper 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 150 250 350 450 550 

### Temperature o 

### CPercent Operation Perkins Model 4.236/ld 33777 80 BHP
February24 , 201 0 r-,- ^ P --.,,,.„^__.., , Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHoo d ' Secretary, ^ Unite d State s Departqnen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerseyAvenue , S E Washington , D.C

. 

### 2059 0 Subject : Haned a Combinatio n Service s Allocatio n Proceedin g DOT-OST-2010-001 8 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : A s a dedicate d trave l partne ro fAmerica n ALrlinesJ.am writingHv^upport^jfT^rrrertcafT s applicatio n t o provid e ne wservic e fro m Ne wYork' s Joh n F

. Kenned yInternationa l Airpor t an d Lo

s Angele s Internationa l Airpor tt o Toky o Internationa l Airpor ta tHaneda

. I recogniz e an d applau d yo u an d th e Obam a administratio n fo ryou rsucces s las t Decembe ri n reachin g a landmar k Ope n Skie s agreemen t wit h Japan , whic h open s u p Haned a t o servic e b yU.S

. airlines

. I encourag e you rselectio n o fAmerica n Airline s t o provid e nonsto p servic e fro m Ne w Yor k an d Lo s Angele s t o Haned a i n orde rt o provid e a n essentia l connectio n betwee n thre e o fth e world' s larges t financia l an d commerc e centers

. Recen t events , includin g th e successfu l preservatio n o fJapa n Airlines ' oneworl d Allianc e membership , hav e underscore d American' s stron g commitmen tt o th e trans-Pacifi c market

. America n i s likewis e committe d t o Ne wYor k an d Lo s Angele s - bot h vita l foca l point s o fbusiness , trade , entertainment , technolog yan d educatio n - providin g unsurpasse d ai rservic e sinc e th e mid-1900 s Bot h th e Ne wYor k

an d Lo s Angele s metr o area s wil l gai n significan teconomi cbenefit s fro m thes e propose d pe wflights , a s wil l American' s customer s an d employees

. However , w e nee d yqu rhel p t o make th e JF K& LAX/Haned a connectio n a reality

. Therefore , I strongl yurg e yo u t o sa yye s t o America n Airline s an d it s reques tfo rslot s t o fl yfro m Kenned yan d Lo s Angele s t o Haneda ! Sincerely , 

# oj-/^-/ O