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

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          13,884
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,740
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     88,520
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          23,004
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            23,779
<LOANS>                                        185,194
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,277
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 328,406
<DEPOSITS>                                     287,336
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,550
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,374
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,450
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,476
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,220
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 328,406
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 14,876
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,982
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   394
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                20,252
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               8,499
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,648
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           11,604
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      910
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (17)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,558
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,115
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,537
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,537
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.99
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.99
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.55
<LOANS-NON>                                        590
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,647
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   561
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    800
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,532
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      711
<RECOVERIES>                                       546
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,277
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,866
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,411
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.8
                                                                    ------------

                            PROMISSORY STRAIGHT NOTE


$250,000.00                                                       March 15, 2000
-----------                                                       --------------



         On or before  May 1, 2000,  45 days  after  date,  without  grace,  the
undersigned  maker of this  note  promises  to pay to the  order of The  Reserve
Foundation Trust (hereinafter referred to as "Holder") located as 97 GRANBY ST.,
KINGSTOWN,  ST. VINCENT the principal sum of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand  Dollars
($250,000.00)  with interest from the date hereof on the unpaid principal at the
rate of 12% INTEREST per annum,  which will be paid at the time the principal is
paid.

         THE TERM is for a period of 45 days  from the date  hereof  payable  in
lawful money of the United State.

         IN DEFAULT of payment when due the whole sum of principal  and interest
shall become immediately due at the option of the holder of this note. If action
be  instituted  on this note,  I promise to pay such sum as the Court may fix as
attorney's  fees,  plus costs and all expenses in connection with the collection
thereof.

Signed this 15th day of March, 2000

Enter Tech Corporation
430 E. 6th St.
Loveland, CO 80537



By: /s/Sam J. Lindsey
   --------------------------

(Its duly authorized agent)
99-1168.

#### State v. Duff.

Stark App. No. 1997CA00143. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.
# C_2015350EN.01000101.xml

| 22.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 350/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 350/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7774 — Antofagasta/Barrick/Zaldivar)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 350/01)

On 15 October 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7774. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7774. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
For more information, please contact your CWA Project Officer or Kristin Gullatt, Manager of the Water Division, Tribal Office at (415) 972-3432. 

### Understanding Total Nitrogen: There are three forms of nitrogen that are commonly measured in water bodies: ammonia, nitrates and nitrites. Total nitrogen is the sum of total kjeldahl nitrogen (ammonia, organic and reduced nitrogen) and nitrate

- nitrite. It can be derived by monitoring for organic nitrogen compounds, free

- ammonia, and nitrate

- nitrite individually and adding the components together. An acceptable range of total nitrogen is 2 mg/L to 6 mg/L, though it is recommended to check tribal, state, or federal standards for an adequate comparison of your
data. 

### Total Nitrogen is an essential nutrient for plants and animals.

However

, an excess amount o f nitrogen in a waterway may lead to low levels of dissolved oxygen and negatively alter various plant life and organisms . Sources of nitrogen
include: wastewater treatment plants, runoff from fertilized lawns and croplands, failing septic systems, runoff from animal manure and storage areas, and industrial discharges that contain corrosion inhibitors.



### Monitoring Equipment : Depending upon monitoring objectives set forth in an environmental program, the following equipment options are commonly used to
collect total nitr ogen data from the field.

Readily available and economically priced:

 Total Nitrogen K its

For each component of total nitrogen, the following can be used and are of g reater precision and higher cost:

 Meters

 Multiparameter Probes

 Contract Laboratories (if necessary)

For additional information: www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/volunteer/stream Storm runoff from a cattle operation can increase Total Nitrogen

levels in a water body.

Trash areas like this may leach chemicals that can increase Total Nitrogen during a storm event into a water body. 

# Total Nitrogen Revised 6/4/2013
1 

16-324-cv 

Maitland v. Konica Minolta Bus. Sols. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 

SUMMARY ORDER 

Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed 

on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by Federal Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 32.1 and this Court’s Local Rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a 

document filed with this Court, a party must cite either the Federal Appendix or an 

electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order 

must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel. 

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at 

the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, 

on the 21st day of November, two thousand sixteen. 

PRESENT: JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 

ROSEMARY S. POOLER, 

BARRINGTON D. PARKER, 

Circuit Judges. 

 

EDSON MAITLAND, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 16-324-cv 

v. 

KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

 

FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: Edson Maitland, pro se, Palm Coast, FL 

FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE: Mitchell Boyarsky, Gibbons P.C., New 

York, N.Y. 
2 

Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New 

York (Joan M. Azrack, Judge). 

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, 

ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and hereby is 

AFFIRMED. 

Appellant Edson Maitland, proceeding pro se, appeals from the District Court’s grant of 

summary judgment in favor of his former employer, Konica Minolta Business Solutions (“KMBS”), 

on his claims of discrimination and retaliation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the 

Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq.; the Family Medical Leave Act, 29 

U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.; and New York state law. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying 

facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal. 

We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment, with the view that summary 

judgment is appropriate only “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any 

material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sousa v. Marquez, 702 F.3d 

124, 127 (2d Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). 

Upon such review, we conclude that the District Court properly granted summary judgment 

to KMBS. We therefore affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the District Court in its 

thorough and well-reasoned January 25, 2016 decision. 

CONCLUSION 

We have considered all of Maitland’s remaining arguments and find them to be without 

merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court. 

 FOR THE COURT: 

 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

The following certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or
otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and
irrespective of any general incorporation language in any filings.

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 on Form 10-Q/A of Advanced Analogic Technologies
Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, for the second quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, each of the undersigned officers of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his respective knowledge:

(1) the accompanying report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the second quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated for the periods presented therein.

Date: October 5, 2009



/s/    RICHARD K.
WILLIAMSRichard K. WilliamsChief Executive Officer


Date: October 5, 2009



/s/    BRIAN R.
MCDONALDBrian R. McDonaldChief Financial Officer


A signed original of the above certification has been provided to Advanced
Analogic Technologies Incorporated and will be retained by Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Thompson, Appellant, vs. The Caledonia Fire Insurance Company, Respondent.

*March IS*—

March *27, 1896.*

*Insurance against fire: Unoccupied dwelling: Court and jury: Amendment of pleading.*

1. In an action upon a policy containing a provision that the company will not *“pay*any loss on a dwelling which at the time of the loss or damage has remained unoccupied seven days,” where it appeared without dispute that the house was unoccupied at the time of the fire, and had been so unoccupied for more than seven days continuously, a verdict was properly directed for the defendant.

2. “Where the original answer in such case did not contain an allegation of nonoccupancy, the allowance, at the trial, of an amendment setting up that fact was not an abuse of discretion, where, as a condition of the amendment, plaintiff was offered a continuance at defendant’s expense in case she found she could not proceed.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for "Waupaca county: Chas. M. Webb, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*F. O. Weed,*for the appellant.

For the respondent there was a brief by *Goldberg & Hoxie,.*attorneys, and *Felker, Goldberg & FeTker*and *G. L. Aarons.*of counsel, and oral argument by *G. W. Felker.*

Winslow, J.

This is an action upon a fire insurance policy issued by the defendant, a .mutual town fire insurance com*665pany, upon the plaintiff’s dwelling bouse, which was thereafter, during the life of the policy, destroyed by fire. The policy contained this provision, among others: “Sec. 17. This company will not insure any unoccupied dwelling house, nor will they pay any loss on a dwelling which at the time of the loss or damage has remained unoccupied seven days.” Upon the trial it appeared, without dispute, that the house was unoccupied at the time of the fire, and had been so unoccupied for more than seven days continuously. Upon this fact the court directed a verdict for the defendant, and we do not see how any other course could have been pursued.

The original answer did not contain an affirmative allegation of nonoccupancy, and the court allowed an amendment setting up such fact, upon the trial. This is claimed to be error, but the claim is untenable. The power of the court, in its discretion, to allow amendments to the pleadings, even upon the trial, is too well known to require argument or authority in its support. There does not seem to have been any abuse of such discretion here. The court, as a condition of the amendment, offered the plaintiff a continuance, at the defendant’s expense, in case she found that she could not proceed, but she chose to proceed with the trial. There are no facts in the case showing a waiver by the company of the defense.

*By the.*Oov/rt.— Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     Exhibit 23
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report on Form 10-K
of our reports dated March 7, 1997 on our audits of Systems Plus, Inc. and
Systems Plus Distribution, Inc.; dated February 28, 1997 on our audits of RTI
Business Systems, Inc.; dated March 14, 1997 on our audits of Systems
Management, Inc.; and dated February 28, 1997 on our audits of National Medical
Systems, Inc. which reports are included in Medical Manager Corporation's Form
8-K filed April 8, 1997.


Tampa, Florida
February 6, 1998




<PAGE>   2
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
of Medical Manager Corporation on Form S-1 (File No. 333-13101) and S-8 (File
No. 333-32717) of our report dated February 6, 1998, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Medical
Manager Corporation as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for the three years
ended December 31, 1997, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form
10-K.

                                                        COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Tampa, Florida
February 6, 1998
# C_2015038EN.01000101.xml

| 4.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7366 — Whirlpool / Indesit)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 38/01)

On 13 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7366. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7366. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
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 of Unigene Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ashleigh Palmer, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/  Ashleigh Palmer


Ashleigh Palmer


Chief Executive Officer


November 9, 2010










A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Unigene Laboratories, Inc. and will be retained by Unigene Laboratories, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2015223EN.01000301.xml

| 8.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

7 July 2015

(2015/C 223/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0931 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 133,88 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4614 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,70770 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3288 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0383 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,9830 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,100 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 316,18 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1949 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4813 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,9327 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4722 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3925 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4771 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6487 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4841 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 238,42 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,6408 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,7909 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5730 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 576,82 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1727 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 49,489 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 62,9407 |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,119 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,4547 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,3038 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 69,3950 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0931

JPY

Japanese yen

133,88

DKK

Danish krone

7,4614

GBP

Pound sterling

0,70770

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3288

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0383

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,9830

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,100

HUF

Hungarian forint

316,18

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1949

RON

Romanian leu

4,4813

TRY

Turkish lira

2,9327

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4722

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3925

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4771

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6487

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4841

KRW

South Korean won

1 238,42

ZAR

South African rand

13,6408

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,7909

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5730

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 576,82

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1727

PHP

Philippine peso

49,489

RUB

Russian rouble

62,9407

THB

Thai baht

37,119

BRL

Brazilian real

3,4547

MXN

Mexican peso

17,3038

INR

Indian rupee

69,3950

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2014423EN.01000201.xml

| 26.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7358 — dnata/Stella)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 423/03

On 9 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7358. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7358. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---