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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-1997             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         525,094                 525,094
<SECURITIES>                                15,825,545              15,825,545
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,206,396              15,206,396
<ALLOWANCES>                                 4,675,935               4,675,935
<INVENTORY>                                    194,040                 194,040
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,115,851              28,115,851
<PP&E>                                       7,472,568               7,472,568
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,402,672               2,402,672
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              40,442,416              40,442,416
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,897,639               1,826,057
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        27,146                  27,146
<OTHER-SE>                                  36,672,917              36,672,917
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                40,442,416              40,442,416
<SALES>                                      9,328,728              26,458,853
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,328,728              26,458,853
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,862,931              22,819,952
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,610                 227,522
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,648,671               4,204,384
<INCOME-TAX>                                   725,412               1,849,925
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            923,259               2,354,459
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   923,259               2,354,459
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.16                    0.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16                    0.40
        

</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7477

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. KENNETH LOUIS DAVIS , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Leonie M. Brinkema , District Judge. ( 1:02

- cr - 00552

- LMB

- 1 ; 1:16

- cv - 00633

- LMB )

Submitted : December 17, 2019 Decided: December 20, 2019

Before KING , FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Kenneth Louis Davis , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Louis Davis seeks to appeal the district c ourt’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue a bsent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the dis trict court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or
wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed the record a nd conclude that Davis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Directory of Certificates of Compliance for Radioactive Materials Packages (NUREG-0383)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, July 21, 2021
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6588

STACY W. HOWARD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GEORGETOWN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; MIKE

SWARTZ, Chief Administrator; CHUCK KOCIS,

Major; KENNETH OWENS, Captain; BARRY MARSH,

Captain,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-04-1180-6-13AK)

Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 23, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stacy W. Howard, Appellant Pro Se. William Walter Doar, Jr., Leigh

Taylor Powers, MCNAIR LAW FIRM, PA, Georgetown, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the

court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266

(1988).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Stacy W. Howard seeks to appeal the district court’s

order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in Howard’s 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 (2000) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the

district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.

App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period

under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory

and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S.

257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (1960)). 

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

March 11, 2005. The notice of appeal was filed on April 15, 2005.*

Because Howard failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss

the appeal. We grant Howard’s motion to supplement the record. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
- 3 -

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# L_2015214DE.01003001.xml

| 13.8.2015 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 214/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2015

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 214/30

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) 2015/9 der Kommission vom 6. Januar 2015 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 142/2011 zur Durchführung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1069/2009 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates mit Hygienevorschriften für nicht für den menschlichen Verzehr bestimmte tierische Nebenprodukte sowie zur Durchführung der Richtlinie 97/78/EG des Rates hinsichtlich bestimmter gemäß der genannten Richtlinie von Veterinärkontrollen an der Grenze befreiter Proben und Waren

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 3 vom 7. Januar 2015
  )

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 3 vom 7. Januar 2015

Seite 12, Erwägungsgrund 16 letzter Satz:

anstatt:

„Zwischenerzeugnissen“

muss es heißen:

„Zwischenprodukten“.

Seite 23, Anhang, Nummer 9 zur Änderung von Anhang XII Nummer 3 Buchstabe a der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 142/2011:

anstatt:

„Zwischenerzeugnisse“

muss es heißen:

„Zwischenprodukte“.

---
Exhibit 10.1





Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NO. 2 

MICHAEL S. JEFFRIES EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 to the Employment Agreement is made and entered into on January 28, 2011,
by and between Abercrombie & Fitch Co., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), and Michael S.
Jeffries (the “Executive”).



R E C I T A L S




WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive are parties to that certain Employment Agreement
entered into as of December 19, 2008 (the “Employment Agreement”) pursuant to which the
Executive is employed as the Company’s Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive
Officer;



WHEREAS, the Company has continuously employed the Executive as the Company’s Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to employment agreements or arrangements entered into prior to the Employment
Agreement since February 1992;



WHEREAS, in the Employment Agreement and in other employment agreements between the Company
and the Executive, the Company has provided the Executive with a “golden parachute” tax gross-up
for any taxes incurred by the Executive due to Internal Revenue Code Sections 280G and 4999 (a
“Golden Parachute Tax Gross-Up”);



WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive acknowledge that as part of comprehensive compensation
policy and corporate governance reviews at many publicly held companies, many companies are no
longer providing their executives with a Golden Parachute Tax Gross-Up; and



WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the terms of the Employment Agreement
as set forth herein, effective, except as specifically provided for herein, as of the date hereof,
in order to completely eliminate the Executive’s Golden Parachute Tax Gross-Up.



A G R E E M E N T




NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereto
hereby agree as follows:




	 	1.	 	Section 12 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
	 
	 	 	 	“[reserved for future use].”
	 
	 	2.	 	Except as expressly provided herein, the provisions of the Employment Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed.





[Signature Page Follows]



 


 









 





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Amendment No. 2 as of the date first
written above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH CO.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Ronald A. Robins, Jr.
 	 
	 	 	Ronald A. Robins, Jr., its Senior Vice President, 	 
	 	 	General Counsel and Corporate Secretary 	 
	 	

EXECUTIVE

 	 
	 	/s/ Michael S. Jeffries
 	 
	 	Michael S. Jeffries
##### 



Exhibit 32.02
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented
therein.
 /s/ Robert R. FreemanRobert R. FreemanChief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
November 9, 2005
Exhibit
      23


























**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      hereby
      consent to the use, in the Form 10K-SB of SMI Products, Inc. (the "Company"),
      of
      our report of March 22, 2006 on the financial statements for the year ended
      December 31, 2005. Our report dated March 22, 2006 contains additional comments
      that state that conditions and events exist that cast substantial doubt about
      the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements
      do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
      uncertainty.





***“AMISANO
      HANSON”***





AMISANO
      HANSON


Chartered
      Accountants





Vancouver,
      BC, Canada


February
      5, 2007
EXHIBIT 13.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. (the "Company";) on Form 20-F for the period ended May 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ";Report";), I, Jeffrey A. Pontius, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: December 12, 2008

/s/ Jeffrey A. Pontius



Jeffrey A. Pontius

Chief Executive Officer

Principal Executive Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. and will be retained by International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Vsource, Inc. (the registrant) for the quarter ended October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the report), I, Dennis M. Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
my knowledge:



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



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



Date: December 14, 2004



|    |  |                                                    
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Dennis M. Smith                                
|    |  | Dennis M. Smith                                    
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer                            
|    |  | (Principal Executive Officer and Financial Officer)



This certification accompanies this
report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the registrant for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it
by reference.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.26

                         P&L Coal Holdings Corporation

                 First Amendment to the Stockholders Agreement
                 ---------------------------------------------

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto previously entered into that certain
Stockholders Agreement dated as of May 19, 1998 (the "Stockholders Agreement");

     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 4.4(b) of the Stockholders Agreement, the
parties hereto have the power to amend, modify or supplement the Stockholders
Agreement if they deem it appropriate;

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto deem it in their best interest to amend and
clarify certain rights granted under the Stockholders Agreement to Management
Investors and their Permitted Transferees (as such terms are defined in the
Stockholders Agreement);

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Stockholders Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

                                       I.

     The second sentence of Section 2.5(a) of the Stockholders Agreement is
deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

     The Management Investors may not Transfer Option Shares prior to the
     earlier of (i) the second anniversary of the Initial Public Offering,
     provided, however, that if at any time prior to that date, Lehman and/or
     any Other Lehman Entity (or their Permitted transferees) sell fifty percent
     (50%) of their Shares, and the IRR (as such term is defined in any
     applicable Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreements between the Management
     Investors and the Company (the "Option Agreements")) at the time of such
     sale equals at least twenty-eight percent (28%), any Option Shares acquired
     by Management Investors upon exercise of Superperformance Options (as such
     term is defined in the Option Agreements) may be Transferred at that time,
     but not earlier than one (1) year after the Initial Public Offering, and
     (ii) the fifth anniversary of the Effective Date, except for Transfers
     referred to in Sections 2.4, 2.6 and 2.7 (the "Option Shares No Transfer
     Period", and, together with the Acquired Shares No Transfer Period, the "No
     Transfer Period").

                                      II.

     Section 2.8(b) of the Stockholders Agreement is deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:

     On or about the date one year after an Initial Public Offering, the Company
     agrees to register on Form S-8 (or any replacement form, if such form is
     not then available) all Shares issued to the Management Investors.
Form 10-Q


Exhibit 32.01


Certification of Principal Executive Officer


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 Quarterly Report of Silicon Image, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Camillo Martino, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.














Date: October 27, 2010


/s/ Camillo MartinoCamillo MartinoChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order entered November 20, 2012



### In The 

## Court of $[ppeals i tri t of Texas at
No. 05-12-00819-CV 

### JULIUS HOLMES, ANTONIO SPENCER AND ALL OCCUPANTS OF 3320 PECAN SHADOW WAY, DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellants

Vo DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC., ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-R2, Appellee 

### On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-11-08781-D



### ORDER The Court has before it appellee’s November 6, 2012 motion to dismiss appeal as moot. The Court ORDERS appellant to file a response to the motion within ten days of the date of this order. If appellant does not do so, this appeal may be dismissed without further notice.

MOLLY JUSTICE
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffGeneric  Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants  (NUREG-1437)

# Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants – Regarding River Bend Station, Unit 1 – Final Report (NUREG-1437, Supplement 58)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1437, Supplement 58, Final Report (PDF – 20.4 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2018**Date Published:** November 2018

Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff prepared this supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) in response to Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Entergy Operations, Inc.'s application to renew the operating license for River Bend Station, Unit 1 (RBS) for an additional 20 years. This SEIS includes the NRC staff's analysis that evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives to the proposed action. Alternatives considered include: (1) new nuclear power generation, (2) supercritical pulverized coal, (3) natural gas combined-cycle, (4) a combination of natural gas combined-cycle, biomass, and demand-side management, and (5) no renewal of the license (the no-action alternative). The NRC staff's recommendation is that the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for RBS are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning decisionmakers would be unreasonable. The NRC staff based its recommendation on the following factors:
        - the analysis and findings in NUREG–1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants"
        - the environmental report submitted by Entergy
        - the NRC staff's consultation with Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies
        - the NRC staff's independent environmental review
        - the NRC staff's consideration of public comments

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
EXHIBIT 99.1




                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                               ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES--OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Silverstar Holdings, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Clive Kabatznik, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes--Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:

         (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
               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.


                                                    /s/ Clive Kabatznik
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Name: Clive Kabatznik
                                                    Chief ExecutiveOfficer
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                    Date: May 12, 2003