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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-01-2000
<CASH>                                         6331000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2524000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                   27704000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              37778000
<PP&E>                                        41364000
<DEPRECIATION>                                23978000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                56767000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         23015000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         91000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    32141000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  56767000
<SALES>                                       40914000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              40914000
<CGS>                                         26944000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 26944000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              13495000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (40000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 515000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    188000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             327000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    327000
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         496,850
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,229,646
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             4,493,449
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,300,214
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     80,181,306
<ALLOWANCE>                                    652,426
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              90,100,432
<DEPOSITS>                                  70,005,813
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,112,187
<LONG-TERM>                                  8,900,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,444
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,078,988        
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              90,100,432
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              4,997,609
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              188,357
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               193,593
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             5,379,559
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,043,305
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,477,132
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,902,427
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  170,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,025,329
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                888,520
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     888,520
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   554,809
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.62
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.42
<LOANS-NON>                                        393
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               553,513
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   75,018
<RECOVERIES>                                     3,931
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              652,426
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           652,426
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Brockway McMillan

Director

National Reconnaissance

1 Atch

Establishment of .*.

011111FCtr

NiPtio tit

P.PETtral Sej

ir " f. TOP SECRET

•

COPY-"'

De

C012trot

. • 15 Apri11953 • • • • .

- . •

MEMORANDUM FOR The Deputy Secretary of Defense

SUBJECT: Operations Aspects of the NRO

In regard to the operations aspects of the NRO, I believe that

some clarification of policy is in order. I also believe that the

present organizatiaaal arrangements are inadequate with respect to •

capability for operational planning and analysis, and would like to -

suggest a solution.

The policy question concerns the definition of denied area overfliOt, and NRO responsibility during active military hostilities. I am

proceeding on the basis that denied area overflights are any overflights

of sovereign territory for which specific permission must be obtained

from the 5412 Special Group or higher authority. As to when the NRO

should cease to be responsible for such aircraft overflights, I recommend the policy that this responsibility will be transferred from the .*

Director, NRO to the appropriate military commander upon decision

of the Secretary of Defense or higher authority that the area in question

has become an active theater of militsuoy hostilities... . •

bt regard to the NRO capability for operations phuming and • I attach a paper describing a solution which I recommend.

suggest that you discuss this with the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

. .
is justifying his overall management of the NRP to the monitor

and not to the Secretary of Defense. Other agencies - e.g.,

CIA and the President's Scientific Advisor, - turn to the

monitors rather than the DNRO for information about the NRO

and to suggest or request actions by the NRO. This diffusion

of authority is detrimental to the establishment of proper

management relationships between Secretary of Defense, DNRO,

DoD, and CIA.

5. Within the intelligence community at large, there

is a real difficulty in getting a statement of collection

requirements and technical requirements that is both convincing

to a thoughtful person, and convertible without extensive

"interpretation" into procurement, scheduling, and research

and development decisions.

r- • •

_

I
. TOP SECRET

MbT •

"ub

TOP SEC;; 

Functions: NRO

July 16, 1963

• MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Meeting with Mr. McCone.

Secretary McMillan and Mr. Kiefer met with Mr. McCone,

1500 hours, 16 July 1963, in Mr. McCone ls office, to discuss the

Purcell Report.

, McCone expressed considerable enthusiasm over

tographs he had seen earlier thi He has

appointment to show samples of sion

to the President at 1700 hours, Wednesday, or cified

time Thursday of this week. He suggested that Secretary McMillan

and Mr. Kiefer accompany him to very briefly outline NRO activities and relationship.

The satellite reconnaissance launch schedule for the immediate future was discussed in passing. Secretary McMillan noted

that the ne fission now scheduled for 17 September,

would be advance much as possible.

Secretary McMillan expressed his views on the conclusions

of the Purcell Report. He expressed agreement with the principal

points discussed in the Report and mentioned specifically his interest in image intensification, and in an item not mentioned in the

Report, namely, a Dr. Baker suggestion fo tographic

system usable in manned aircraft, and ex intent to invite

Dr. Baker to Washington to discuss this suggestion in more detail

and to ask Dr. Baker if he would serve as a consultant to the NRO.

Mr. McCone expressed interest in the MURAL improvement

activity and raised the question of additional booster procur

for the LANYARD program. He expressed interest in the

developments and the activity relating to very large optic

He expressed some reservations regarding. the treatment in the

report of satellite vulnerability and was particularly interested in

COPY

11" 1: !/:: :11 BITtitiN

Cail'al System

-- • •
Toe SECRET

the ability to maneuver in orbit. At this point, Secretary McMillan

suggested we conduct a dual-burn experiment on the AGENA after

capsule recovery as soon as possible in the MURAL program.

Mr. McCone raised the question of possible special group consideration of a covert satellite study which is to be followed up by

Mr. Kiefer.

Mr. McCone finally mentioned the 

or 

paragraph of the Purcell

Report. whielycOmmenteon manajemeit.otganization and expressed'

ttartrilWatioiri.Wit is ;aimVIIIM•ftermAIWO factory.

Mr. McCone and Secretary McMillan agreed that as early as

possible in September, a review would be prepared for the Purcell

Committee containing a report on actions taken and studies underway.

Eugene P. Kiefer

Deputy Director

National Reconnaissance Office

COPY

1Ot SLCR

. 2

1:— . • • . •?.,

t iJ:i.it:t111m

Caritiiii System

77.7171111
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 16

- 3894

_____________________________
A NDREW A. C AVE , J R ., Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Russell Healey , Judge

. May 2, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W OLF , R OBERTS , and W ETHERELL , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Rick A. Sichta and Susanne K. Sichta of the Sichta Firm, Jacksonville
, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 5 D0 41 7 . TAMARA NOLAN v . MARQUEZ BURDETTE SR.

Tam ara No l an fi l ed t h i s ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o nary ap p eal fro m t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s o rd er co n cern i ng

, am o n g o t h er i s s u es

, cu s t o dy o f h er m i n o r ch i l d an d fi n d i ng s

o f co n t em

p t ari s i n g f

r o m v is i t at i o n i s s u es

. Un d er OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (a) (1 1 ), d i rect

appe a l s a re p erm i t ted fro m “ [a] l l ju d g m en t s o r o rd ers i n ch i ld cu s t o d y cas es award i n g,

refu si n g t o ch an g e, o r m o di fy i n g ch i l d cu s to d y o r h o l d i n g or decl i ni n g t o h o ld

p ers o n s i n co n t em

p t o f s uch ch il d cu st o d y ju d g m en t s o r o rd ers .” An d “ [v ] i s i t at i o n i s

co n si d ered a cu s t o d y is s u e.” D a n i el s v. Ba r n es

, 2 8 9 Ga. Ap p

. 8 9 7

, 89 9 n

. 1 (6 5 8

SE2 d 4 7 2 ) (2 0 0 8); s ee al s o OCGA § 19 -9 -4 1 (4 ) (d efi n i n g “ ch i l d cu s t o dy

p ro ceed in g ” as “ a p ro ceed i n g i n wh i ch l eg al cu s to dy

, p h y s i cal cu s t o dy

, o r v i s i t at i o n

wi t h r e s p e c t t o a ch i l d i s i n i s su e.”). Th u s, t h e o rd er th at No l an s eek s t o ap p eal i s

d i rect l y ap p eal ab l e. Th e fact t h at No l an wi s h es t o ch al len g e o t h er p o rt i o n s o f t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s o rd er d o es n o t al t er t h i s co n cl u s i o n

. See Co l l i n s v. Da vi s

, 3 1 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 6 5,

2 6 6 -2 6 9 (1 ) (7 33 SE2 d 7 9 8) (2 0 1 2 ) (i f t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er fal l s wi t h i n s co p e o f OCGA

§ 5 -6 -3 4 (a) (1 1 ), th en a d i rect ap p eal i s au t h ori zed reg ard l es s of t h e i s su e rai s ed o n

ap p eal ).

W e wi l l g ran t a t i m el y d i s cret i o n a r y a p p li cat i o n i f t h e l ower co u rt ’ s o rd er i s

s u b ject t o d i r ect ap peal

. See OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (j). Acco rd i ng l y

, t h i s ap p l i cat i o n i s

h ereb y G R A N T E D. N o l an s h al l h av e t en d ay s fro m th e d at e o f t h i s ord er t o fi l e a

n o t i ce o f a p p e a l w it h t h e t ri al co u rt

. If, h o wev er, s h e has al read y fi l ed a n o t i ce o f

ap p eal

, s h e n eed n o t fi le a s eco n d n o t ice. Th e cl erk o f t h e t ri al co u rt i s DIRECTED

t o i ncl ud e a co p y

o f t h is o rd er i n t he reco rd t ran s m i t t ed t o t h e Co u rt o f Ap peal s

. June 03, 2015C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 06/03/2015
exv10w3






Exhibit 10.3




EXECUTION COPY




PLEDGE AMENDMENT




     This Pledge Amendment, dated September 30, 2008, is delivered pursuant to Section 5(c) of the
Pledge Agreement referred to below. The undersigned hereby agrees that this Pledge Amendment may be
attached to the Pledge Agreement, dated as of December 29, 2006, between the undersigned and The
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (formerly The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.), as
agent (the “Pledge Agreement”; capitalized terms defined therein being used herein as therein
defined) and that the shares listed on Schedule I to this Pledge Amendment shall be deemed
to be part of the Pledged Collateral and shall secure all Secured Obligations.



Dated: September 30, 2008




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	NEENAH FOUNDRY COMPANY

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Jeffrey S. Jenkins
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	Jeffrey S. Jenkins 	 
	 	 	Title:  	Corporate Vice President -
Finance and 
Interim Chief
Financial Officer 	 
	 



Pledge Amendment

1 









 





SCHEDULE I

TO PLEDGE AMENDMENT




Pledgor: Neenah Foundry Company




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Stock	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Issuer of	 	Type and Class	 	Certificate	 	 	 	 	 	Number of	 	 
	Pledged Stock	 	of Stock	 	Numbers	 	Par Value	 	Shares	 	Percentage
	Morgan’s Welding,
Inc.
	 	Common	 	 	2	 	 	 	—	 	 	 	100	 	 	 	100	%







1
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CALIPER LIFE SCIENCES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                            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 of Caliper Life Sciences, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E.
Kevin Hrusovsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my 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 result of operations of the
      Company.

                                                   /s/ E. KEVIN HRUSOVSKY
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             E. Kevin Hrusovsky
                                             Chief Executive Officer
Date: March 15, 2004
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00041-CV

SANDERS OIL & GAS, LTD. APPELLANT

V.

NEW TECH ENGINEERING, LP APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 141ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 141-263013-12

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

On February 06, 2015, and February 20, 2015, we notified appellant in 

accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c) that we would dismiss this 

appeal unless the $195 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). 

Appellant has not paid the $195 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of 

appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 16, 2013,

2

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, GABRIEL, and SUDDERTH, JJ.

DELIVERED: March 26, 2015

 

2See Supreme Court of Tex., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil 

Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-district 

Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 13-9127 (Aug. 16, 2013) (listing fees in courts of 

appeals).
Fm:. t

COMINT DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

. February 16, 1972

NOTE FOR COLONEL BRADBURN

I prepared and passed the attached

paper to the ASD(I) shop on Thursday. They

wanted a paragraph on each major intelligence program for Mk. Helms as background

during his presentations to the "Watch

Dog Committees" on March 5. I don't think

we are telling Mr. Helms anything he doesn't

already know, but it seems to fill a square

in the ASD(I) shop.

Lt Colonel, USAF

5;

id

••••

/COMINT

C..
COMINT/

Jointly

516114/41511!!

rl, II S

Paite1

COMINT

PAGE Of

..."."1" • • • P.

.;

40P-SECREF

sc...ett nom crows. : arum:

SOD DINICI'M u3 •t MIS VS' sop..

Jointly

0 TOP-SECREF---

1St NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. O.C.

THE NM STAFF February 16, 1972

MEMORANDUM FOR CC HANDER HORNE

Attached at your request is a statement on the

National Reconnaissance Program for use by Mr. Helms..

Please call me if you need any further information.

'ER L. HO 7-,1

Lt Colonel, USAF 

Deputy Director for

Plans and Policy

1 Attachment

Statement on NRP
al• ••• 111..

. •

.0 .11• • • MOD

• •• T • ....CT' •••••••••0.

• •

•

• II

•

•

THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE PROGRAM

The National Reconnaissance Program is a single, national

program dedicated to the collection, through overflight, of

intelligence to meet the needs and objectives of the United

States Government. The Secretary of Defense is the Executive

Agent for the Pro gram, managing resources of the CIA and DOD

in carryin g out the mission. The entire Program is covert

and comprises the development, management, and operation of

overhead systems for photo graphic or electronic reconnaissance

of denied areas of the world (peripheral reconnaissance is a

separate responsibility managed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.)

The National Reconnaissance Program is responsive directly and

solely to the intelligence collection requirements and priorities established by the United States Intelligence Board.

Today the United States depends on the National Reconnaissance Program for most of its strategic information on

closed societies.
CO•? lof target dates bywhich time annually the NRO would receive

1 authoritative requirements guidance from the USIB to be

vitt_ ! . compatible with financial/budget decision timing. It seems

The first meeting of the Group will be on Monday,

/February 12, 1968, at 2 p.m.-and I look forward to seeing 4 you in my office at'that time. In anticipation of that

'meeting I am distributing a proposal for the establishment

KALI 13 -$i

MP-SECRET- 0

• 11111

1St NATIONA • RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 111111114111.PM11

WASHINGTON. O.C. •

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR WORM COPY

RPG-D-1

February 6, 1968

MEMORANDUM FORS'

Dr. Steininger, PSAC Staff

Mr. Duckett, DD/S&T, CIA

NSA Re resentative

usnaanoe SUBJECT:

SAYS A I

7 I

Reconnaissance Planning Group

Attached for your information and records is the

exchange of correspondence between the Director of Central

Intelligence, Mr. Helms, and the Director of the National

Reconnaissance Office, Dr. Flax, with regard to the establishment of the Reconnaissance Planning Group. Attached

to Mr. Helms's letter are the approved Terms of Reference

for the Group. As you will notice from Dr. Flax's letter, De

I as charged to proceed with implementation of these Terms

of Reference.

•

- -

to me this is one of the most pressing problems which needs . • 'sorting out looking toward the improvement of overall NRP

planning.

At this first meeting, let us review the Terms of

Reference and identify the problems to which we should turn

our attention and their order of priority. Would you give

WORM COPY

TOP-SE-RETnames yew among eseaseva

see eeniele sumer can Or NM,

Del

CU"
. .

TOP-SECREFRPG-D-1

this your careful consideration. May I suggest that you

set your preliminary thoughts to paper prior to this first

meeting.

es Q. Reber

irman

eoonnaissance Planning Group

Attachments

Dell1

19585-67

12571-68

cc: Mr. John ►hes DIA

Gen. D1NRO Staff.

•

vaiont v.

IP-SECRETMunn De11111112625 -68

!SP, Or coin

enema rem fonsease 1g1111M Patti

NO 10111CTIVI 111110.1111 Mall Off NM
•

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE

• n••

•••

Lit

••••••-• ••••••••••W. ••••••"•n••:1:111..r:::Tr. rjr•a •

•

•

;tt•161

A.

• .

• ••• 1::;.• • •

0.

•

.

• 5*..
DEPARTMENT OP THE AIR FORCE

WASHINGTON

OPFICI Oft THE 0140101 MIONETAMIY

July 1, 1964

•.

ei•

MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL CARTER, CIA

In response to your memorandum e, I have

authorized the extension of contra under its

present terms for thirty days.

My proposals for centralizing the management of

the CORONA project have been before the DCI in writing

for somewhat more than eight months. They have been

discussed with him in extenso on four separate occasions.

They were discussed with you and Dr. Wheelon and Dr. Fubini

on approximately 10 December. The only substantial

difference between my present recommendations and those

made on 28 October 1963 to the DCI is the determination

that Aerospace Corporation should carry the responsibility

for over-all systems engineering and technical direction.

Such an assignment of responsibility has been explicitly

identified in all discussions as a possibility for almost

six of the past eight months.

I infer from your memorandum of 30 June that one

ingredient necessary for a determination by the DCI of

his final position on this matter is . a recommendation from

you and Dr. Wheelon. Your memorandum indicates that you

will be able to assist the DCI in this regard on or about

July 6. In view of the long previous history of discussions

on this matter, it appears that little further explanation

can be required for an early resolution.

I have recommended to Mt. Vance that he arrange a

meeting with the DCI to settle the matter during the week

of 6 July.

BROCKWAY MdMILLAN

Director

40-National Reconnaissance Office
99-765.

#### State v. Suffecool.

Stark App. No. 1998CA00101. The discretionary appeal is allowed on Propositions of Law Nos. Ill, IV, and V.

*1442
      *Sua sponte,*this cause is to be argued on the same date as 99-286, *State v. Williams,*Lake App. No. 97-L-191.

*Sua sponte,*99-764, *State v. Worthy,*Portage App. No. 97-P-0059, is to be briefed on Propositions of Law Nos. I through V and is to be argued on the same date as 99-286 and 99-765.

Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.