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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,111
<SECURITIES>                                    29,280
<RECEIVABLES>                                      303
<ALLOWANCES>                                        17
<INVENTORY>                                        413
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,887
<PP&E>                                           6,403
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,324
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,317
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,149
<BONDS>                                          6,115
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,100
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,317
<SALES>                                            562
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   562
<CGS>                                              650
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      650
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,497
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     7
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 187
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,067)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,067)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.43)
        

</TABLE>
Linda Icenhauer-Ramirez

1103 Nueces, Austin, Texas 78701

Phone: 512-477-7991 Fax: 512-477-3580

E-Mail: ljir@aol.com

Attorney and

Counselor at Law

December 10, 2015

Mr. Jeffrey Kyle, Clerk

Third Court of Appeals of Texas

P.O. Box 12547

Austin, Texas 78711

Re: State of Texas v. Ricardo Rodriguez Calderon

 Court of Appeals Cause No. 03-15-00714-CR 

Trial Court Cause No. CR 14-0384 in the 22nd District Court of Hays County, Texas

Dear Mr. Kyle:

This is to inform the court that I have been appointed to represent the Appellant Ricardo 

Rodriguez Calderon in this appeal. Attached is a copy of my appointment. Please put me down 

as counsel of record in this cause and notify me of all further action in this case. Pursuant to 

Tex.R.App.Proc. 6.2, please find below my contact information:

Linda Icenhauer-Ramirez

Attorney at Law

1103 Nueces

Austin, Texas 78701

Phone: 512-477-7991

Fax: 512-477--3580

Email: ljir@aol.com

SBN: 10382944

If you need any further information from me, please contact me.

Sincerely,

/s/ Linda Icenhauer-Ramirez

Linda Icenhauer-Ramirez

cc: Ms. Jennifer Stalbaum, Asst. District Attorney

Hays County District Attorneys Office

ACCEPTED

03-15-00714-CR

8180564

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

12/10/2015 1:58:57 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/10/2015 1:58:57 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
Oi=F!CEOFTHEATTORNEY GkNERALOFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 
t&e oanvaas VOII made ia due time, the votes 

~opntea andtabalsted and the Co. Judge marked 

oa the vote tabulation sheet the aords~ *Beet&on ordered carried,' Slgpeil County Jud@. f 

&o~not f%ud in the papers or tinutas say proala- 

;&atilyu the Co. Judge ever amde or auy evidenoe 

:'fbPt.a proelamatlon was we.r posted at the Court- 

@us.e door for 30 tiys. Ha, under art. 6961 

reaXdwo bare aprimaftie case andavalld 

'eldotion even thon@a we oamwt find the procla- 

'Iprtianorrecerd of ltsharingbeem posted? 

1. Terry Couuty is Wt. authorized to hold an slection,~ wxler Artiole 696.4, of,the aarised citil Statutee of 

Texaf~, since the county is not enumerated in the counties 

tlteMmna#dasbeneflciariee or theohopter. -v 

Under the h01din.g of the Court of Criminal Ap-. 

peals, in~ghoes T. State, 4% S. W. (2) 739, citedby joa 

it ia our oy2inbu that the election ordered in Terry county c4 

&member 8, 1924,~ is vo3.d. 

met epinion jtlst a53ntloned aonstruad Artiolo a959, 

lceY%seJd Ciril statutos, $92& in respeot to the eharaoter and 

extentofpubllshednotioe,the 6tatutebelagr 

Vlhe Comtp Judge shall issue au order 

for such election and cause public hotieee 

thereof to be given for at least thirty days 

betors the day of eleotion,bj publication 

of the order tharef+or in sosae rxwspaptir published in the county, if there be OPO.~ 

The etatuta Is UnC~sd. 

The notice rhlch was held to be %nsufTident was 

published iis a dpLly paper in the oitF oi Houston ouco a 

reek for four succesalve reeks, begl.nn%ng on Tuesday, April 

22, 1930, and bml3.n.g on Tueedsy, Xay 13, 1930, the parlod between the first and laat publication being twenty-two days. 

The election ras held in iiarrls County on Saturday, Uay 24, 

I930. ma wurt saiut 
200 

Honorableil.ii.virgil Crawford- page 3 

aThe trot that the groat aqerity ei 

counties in this State have no daily paper 

aouZd indicate that it 80s not the intention of the Legislature to req&,re piblicat&m in a dally paper. Areokly piper, in 

our opinion, would aawrer the reqairfment 

of thf3. etatute, but the publf4at.lon slust 

oontisne in each succoecdve lrrrrtls of the 

paper during at least thirty days before 

the day of election.* 

Concerning the election held In Terry County, 

you say1 

*Terry County held an eleotlo?a oa the 

abore on January 24, I%?S. The election 

was ordered DeOe8OiW 8, 1934. end ~Otiot! 

tUtsot pubUsaea fram Dectuiber ,s2 to Jaw 

uaryl20t1926. s&l& n0tL40 was publl.ldIod for tNrty days b&ore the election but 

not ,&u?xt preoedj‘ng slmJe.* 

ue tNnk these isets bx%ag ysur emotion with&n 

,the,holdlng of the hurt of i2'hhal A-18. 

3. Xou ceuld not make 8 prbm Peale case for fhs 

elerriim of January’24, 1926, if tho mlmztes of the carmrrdo- 

.$#Uumrs* Courts&mm the truth,becau~,as WC have 8bom, 

.$W aotiao was not rqplarly ptrbUsbed and for the ttrrthsr 

r!%san ae twder ahming the rosEa.lt of tmab oleotion has 

War been recorded in tho dxmtes of the CuwUsdoaers~ 

-Art, as required by Article 8961, of the Rerieed M-1 

8tatutee, the 3.av being the s~lse then as now. 

I very tray ywrs 

ATTQRX2X
#### OPPERMAN v. STATE.

No. 19609.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 6, 1938.

Appeal Reinstated May 18, 1938.

J. M. Davenport, of San Angelo, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

Conviction is for violation of the liquor law; punishment, a fine of $100.

The record fails to show that notice of appeal was given and entered upon the minutes of the trial court. In the absence of such a showing, this court is without jurisdiction to hear and determine matters sought to be presented for review. See Long v. State, 3 Tex. App. 321; Lenox v. State, 55 Tex.Cr.R. 259, 116 S.W. 816; Roberts v. State, 99 Tex.Cr.R., 492, 269 S.W. 103; article 827, C.C.P.

The attempted appeal is dismissed.

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.

On Motion to Reinstate Appeal.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The transcript having been perfected by the filing of a certified copy of the notice of appeal, the appeal will be reinstated and considered on its merits.

The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception.

Appellant made some objections to the charge of the court, but presented no special charges relative thereto as is required in misdemeanor cases. In the absence of the facts adduced upon the trial, this court is unable to appraise the complaints made of the charge.

The appeal is reinstated and the judgment is affirmed.
-1- 09

- 25 05

- ag H uang v. H ol der 1 UNITED STATE S COURT OF AP PEALS 2 FO R T HE SE CO ND CI RC UI T 3 4 SUMMARY ORD ER 5 6 RU L I NG S B Y S UMM AR Y OR DE R DO N OT HA VE P RE CE DE NT I AL E F F E CT . C I T AT I ON T O A 7 S UM M ARY ORD ER FI LED ON OR A FT ER J ANU ARY 1 , 2 0 0 7 , I S P ERM I TTED AND I S GO VERN ED 8 B Y FE D E R A L R U L E O F A PP E L L A T E PR O C E D U R E 32. 1 A N D T H IS C O U R T ’ S L O C A L R U L E 32. 1. 1. 9 W HEN CI TI NG A S UM M ARY ORD ER I N A DO CUM ENT FI LED W I TH TH I S COU RT, A P ARTY 10 M US T C I T E E I T HE R T HE F E DE RA L A P P E ND I X OR A N E L E CT RO NI C DA T AB AS E ( W I T H T HE 11 N O TA TI O N “ SUM M A R Y O R D ER ” ) . A PA R TY CI TI N G A SUM M A R Y O R D ER M U ST S ER V E A CO PY 12 OF I T ON AN Y PARTY NO T REPRES ENTED BY CO UNSEL. 13 14 At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circui t, held at the 15 Daniel Patri ck Moynihan United St ates Courthouse , 500 Pearl Stre et, in the City of New York, 16 on the 4 day of August, two thousand and ten. th 17 18 PRESENT : 19 20 GU ID O C ALAB RE SI , 21 ROSEMAR Y S. POOL ER, 22 DENNYCHIN, 23 Circu it J ud ges . 24

___________________________________________________ 25 26 Yuang Zee HUANG , 27 28 Pe tition er , 29 30 -v. - No . 0 9-2 50 5-a g 31 32 33 Eric H . H OL DE R, Jr. , Atto rne y G en era l of theUn ite d S tat es, 34 35 Resp on de nt, 36 37

___________________________________________________ 38 39 Su

bmitt ed fo r P lai nti ff

-App ell ee: MIC HAELBROW N, Law O ff

ice s o f M ich ael 40 Brown, New York, N.Y
. 41-2- 1 Su bmitt ed fo r D ef en dants -App ell ants: CH RI ST OP HE R P . M cG REAL , Unit ed St ate s 2 Department of Justice, Office of Immigration 3 Litigati on, W ashington, D.C. 4 5

___________________________________________________ 6 7 AFTER

ARGUMENT AND UP ON DUE CONS IDERAT ION of thi s m oti on

fo r a 8 stay pending r esolution of a pet ition for revi ew of a judgm ent enter ed by the Board of 9 Immigrati on Appeals, it i s hereby ORDERED , ADJUDGED , AND DE CREED that the motion 10 is GRANTED
. 11

___________________________________________________ 12 13 Pe tit ion er Yuan Z ee Huangfi led anap pe al f

rom theBo ard

of Imm igr ati on

Ap pe als ’s 14 de nia l of

his untim ely

m oti on to r eo pe n and

m ov ed thi s C ourt t o s tay

his ord er o f r em ov al 15 pending the re solution of his appe al. Before submitting its br ief on the merits, the Government 16 moved to dism iss Huang’s appea l pursuant t o the fugitive di sentitl ement doctrine. The 17 Government’s m otion is her eby held in abeyance pending full bri efing on the merits. Se e Wuv. 18 Ho lde r , N o. 09 -25 64 (2d Ci r. Augus t 4, 20 10 ). The pane l of thi s co urt

he ari ngthem eri ts s ho uld 19 be sent the Government’s m otion for dismissal. We grant Huang’s stay of removal pending 20 action

by that pane l. 21 22 FOR THECOURT : 23 Cathe rin e O ’H ag anW olf e, Cl erk of Co urt 24 25
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19
- 0713 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. S ILAS CORPRON ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 24 , 20 20 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 17 2020

06/17/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0713
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001013148
<NAME>                        XYBERNAUT CORPORATION
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                            446,024
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     256,872
<ALLOWANCES>                       78,211
<INVENTORY>                     1,589,025
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,546,026
<PP&E>                            815,963
<DEPRECIATION>                    334,442
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  4,019,630
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           1,412,922
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                     3,880,823
<COMMON>                          157,457
<OTHER-SE>                     (1,431,842)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    4,019,360
<SALES>                           127,227
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  127,227
<CGS>                             107,571
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     107,571
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                1,514,141
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (1,489,321)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (1,489,321)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                   (1,489,321)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.10)
        


</TABLE>
Organized Village of Kake 

P.O. Box 316 

Kake, Alaska 99830-0316 

Telephone 907-785-6471 

Fax 907-785-4902/ email KeexKwaan@KakeFirstNation.org 

(Federally Recognized Tribal Government serving the Kake, Alaska area) 

Michael Martin 

Essential Air Service Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department ofTranspmtation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

June 1, 2012 

RE: Essential Air Service Provider for Kake Alaska 

Dear Mr. Martin: 

At the May 29, 2012 meeting of the Organized Village of Kake (OVK) IRA Council, support was 

formally given to the proposal for Air Excursions LLC under the Essential Air Service (EAS) contract 

serving our community of Kake Alaska. Representatives of OVK were able to gather information 

from both carriers proposing to serve Kake, and after weighing multiple factors important to our 

community, the council feels that Air Excursions best meets the needs of our community. 

Given our rural location without road access, reliable air service is truly essential to our day-to-day life 

and the title of the EAS program is aptly named and vitally needed. We trust that your office will 

work with the selected airline offering services under EAS, so that they may do so in a manner that not 

only fulfills Kake's needs, but also allows them to operate in a fiscally viable manners - for that to 

occur, we thank the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Departn1ent of Transportation for the Essential Air 

Service Subsidy Program that is so critical in rural communities such as Kake, Alaska. 

In closing, we wish to thank your office for its willingness to work with us and to seek community 

comment on the Essential Air Service contract award. If any additional information or comments may 

be needed please advise; and as we move into the future, please keep our tribal government office in 

the decision process for matters related to this impmtant service. 

Sincerely, 

Gary E. Williams 

Executive Director
Order filed, June 6, 2022.

 In The

Court of Appeals 

For The

First District of Texas 

____________

NO. 01-22-00377-CV

THE CITY OF HOUSTON, Appellant

V.

NIKOLETTE LEDESMA AND ELSA ESTRADA, Appellee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case 2017-84026

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due May 27, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 

35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The 

record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed 

timely, we issue the following order.

We order Julia Rivera, the official (or substitute) court reporter, to file the record 

in this appeal, if any, within 10 days of the date of this order.

PER CURIAM
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Pierre Jean Jacques Renelique, as Assignee of INNIS OSWALD, Appellant, September 19, 2016<br><br>against<br><br>Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Larry Love, J.), entered October 1, 2013. The order denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. </p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. </p><p>Plaintiff correctly argues on appeal that the affidavits submitted by defendant did not sufficiently set forth a standard office practice or procedure that would ensure that defendant's denial of claim form had been timely mailed (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]). Thus, defendant did not demonstrate its entitlement to summary judgment.</p><p>However, contrary to plaintiff's contention, plaintiff failed to demonstrate its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment, as the affidavit plaintiff submitted in support of its motion failed to establish that the claim at issue had not been timely denied (<a href="../2015/2015_04787.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Viviane Etienne Med. Care, P.C. v Country-Wide Ins. Co.</i>, 25 NY3d 498</a> [2015]), or that defendant had issued a timely denial of claim that was conclusory, vague or without merit as a matter of law (<a href="../2010/2010_08933.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Westchester Med. Ctr. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.</i>, 78 AD3d 1168</a> [2010]; <a href="../2011/2011_51292.htm" target="_blank"><i>Ave T MPC Corp. v Auto One Ins. Co.</i>, 32 Misc 3d 128</a>[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51292[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2011]). </p><p>Accordingly, the order is modified by providing that defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied. </p><p>Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: September 19, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
**Exhibit 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statement on Form S-8(333-97863)  of CytoCore, Inc. of our report dated April 16,2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of CytoCore, Inc. as of December 31, 2006, andthe related consolidated statement of operations, stockholders’ deficit and cash flow for the yearthen ended, which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of CytoCore, Inc. for the yearended December 31, 2007.Our report dated April 16, 2007, contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company hassuffered recurring losses from operations and is dependent upon access to additional externalfinancing, which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Theconsolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcomeof that uncertainty.Our report dated April 16, 2007 also notes that we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply anyprocedures to the adjustment to retrospectively apply the effects of the one-for-ten reverse stocksplit described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31,2007 and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance about whethersuch adjustments are appropriate and have been properly applied. Those adjustments were audited byother auditors./s/ Amper, Politziner & Mattia, P.C.Edison, New Jersey
### Table 9. Cost Effectiveness of MACT Floors: Overall and by **Subcategory** Appendix A



# Table 8. Cost Effectiveness of MACT Floors: Overall and by Subcategory
**A. Compliance by Additional Control Only Subcategory**  **Total Annual Cost ($/y** **r) Total Emission** 

**Reductions (tpy) Cost Effectiveness ($/tpy**  **pollutant reduced)** Energy recovery unit - Liquid/Gas $7,859,052 2,936 $2,677 Energy recovery unit - Solids $148,464,875 8,607 $17,249 Incinerator $17,051,800 292 $58,374 Small, remote $2,901,032 7 $388,794 Waste-burning kiln $108,616,047 22,564 $4,814 **Overall $284,892,806**  **34,406 $8,280** 


### B. Compliance or Most Inexpensive Disposal Alternative **Subcategory Total Annual Cost**  **($/y r)**  **Total Emission**

**Reductions (tpy) Cost Effectiveness ($/tpy**  **pollutant reduced)** Energy recovery unit - Liquid/Gas $7,859,052 2,936 $2,677 Energy recovery unit - Solids $148,464,875 8,607 $17,249 Incinerator $3,645,704 479 $7,606 Small, remote $1,752,227 7 $234,832 Waste-burning kiln $108,616,047 22,564 $4,814 **Overall a**  **$270,337,904 34,593**  **$7,815** a - emissions adjusted to account for landfill flare emissions from gas generated from diverted waste

Note: Total Annual Cost is derived from calculations described previously in this memo. Total Emission Reductions are derived in the CISWI Emission Reductions Memo.
Filed by sedaredgar.com - Exploration Drilling International Inc. - Exhibit 10.70






Addendum to the loan agreement dated 11/09/2007 

Extension

 LOAN AGREEMENT 

between 

EDI Exploration Drilling International Holding GmbH

Represented by the Managing Director [“Geschäftsführer”] 
Günter Thiemann

Goethestrasse 61 
45721 Haltern am See 

- in the following referred to as Lender -

and 

EDI Exploration Drilling International GmbH, 
represented by
the Managing Director [“Geschäftsführer”] 
Christian Runge 
Goethestrasse
59 
45721 Haltern am See 

- in the following referred to as Borrower -

The loan agreement, to which this addendum applies, is changed,
effective immediately, in Section 2 paragraphs 2 and 3 as follows: 

Section 2               
  Interest, term and repayment of loan 

	 	2. 	
      The term shall be extended by approx. 6.5 months and ends
      on March 31, 2009.

	 	3. 	
      The loan shall be repaid on March 31, 2009 into the
      Lender’s account.



All of the other provisions remain unchanged and valid. 

Haltern, on September 8, 2008 

	[Signature] 	 	  
	  	 	  
	EDI Holding GmbH 	 	EDI GmbH 
	Günter Thiemann 	 	Christian Runge 
	- Lender - 	 	- Borrower - 
	  	 	  
	  	 	  
	[File name]