alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

                Exhibit 27.1 - Financial Data Schedule


<ARTICLE> 5
<PERIOD-TYPE>       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                              19,600,070
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                          654,703
<ALLOWANCES>                           124,370
<INVENTORY>                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    21,145,730
<PP&E>                              16,911,507
<ACCUMULATED-DEPRECIATION>           2,753,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      35,923,882
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                4,381,095
<BONDS>                              4,590,421
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                               160,000
<OTHER-SE>                          26,792,366
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        35,923,882
<SALES>                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     2,189,766
<CGS>                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        1,174,619
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    12,832,777
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       351,839
<AMORTIZATION-DEBT>                     98,783
<INCOME-PRETAX-OTHER>              (11,817,630)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (11,631,201)
<DISCOUNTED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                       (11,631,201)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            (0.75)
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0.00


</TABLE>
- 1 -

State of New York

Court of Appeals

MEMORANDUM

This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to 

revision before publication in the New York Reports.

No. 52 SSM 2 

The People &c.,

 Respondent,

 v.

Justin Hymes,

 Appellant.

Submitted by Nathaniel V. Riley, for appellant.

Submitted by Nicole K. Intschert, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Initially, defendant asserts 

that County Court erroneously admitted certain testimony regarding the victim’s out-of-
- 2 - SSM No. 2

- 2 -

court disclosures of sexual abuse, and failed to instruct the jury that such evidence could 

be considered only for the “purpose of explaining the investigative process and completing 

the narrative of events leading to the defendant’s arrest” (People v Ludwig, 24 NY3d 221, 

231 [2014]; see People v Cullen, 24 NY3d 1014, 1016 [2014]). Because defendant did not 

object on either basis before the trial court, we conclude that these arguments are 

unpreserved and, therefore, unreviewable by this Court (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v 

Bayne, 82 NY2d 673, 676 [1993]; People v West, 56 NY2d 662, 663 [1982]; compare

People v Smith, 22 NY3d 462, 465 [2013]). Furthermore, on this record, defendant has 

failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating “the absence of strategic or other legitimate 

explanations” for trial counsel’s failure to lodge an objection to the testimony now 

challenged on appeal or to seek a limiting instruction with respect to such testimony 

(People v Honghirun, 29 NY3d 284, 289 [2017] [internal quotation marks and citations 

omitted]; see People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]). Therefore, defendant’s claim 

of ineffective assistance of counsel on this direct appeal must be rejected. To the extent 

defendant wishes to advance such a claim based upon matters outside the record, he may 

commence a proceeding pursuant to CPL 440.10 (see People v Mendoza, 33 NY3d 414, 

419 n [2019]; People v Brown, 45 NY2d 852, 853-854 [1978]).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, in a 

memorandum. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and 

Feinman concur.

Decided March 26, 2020
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhiit 21.1

Corporate Subsidiaries of Open Text Corporation as at June 30, 2002

Open Text Inc.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois)

         Subsidiary:       Information Dimensions International Corp
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the
                           State of Delaware)
                                   Subsidiaries:    Information Dimensions, SARL
                                                    (a Corporation incorporated
                                                    under the laws of France)

                                                    Open Text, GmbH
                                                    (a Corporation incorporated
                                                    under the laws of Germany)

         Subsidiary:       LeadingSide Acquisition Company
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the
                           State of Delaware)

         Subsidiary:       Bluebird Systems
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the
                           State of California)
Base4 Inc.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada)

         Subsidiary:       Base4 Corp.
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the
                           State of California)



Open Text International BV
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands)

         Subsidiary:       Open Text UK Limited
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the
                           United Kingdom)

         Subsidiary:       Open Text ApS
                           (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of
                           Denmark)

Open Image Systems Inc.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada)

b2bScene Inc.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of the province of New
         Brunswick)

Open Text AG
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Switzerland)

Open Text Pty Ltd.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Australia)

Open Text Acquisition Corp.
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada)

Lava Systems
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Barbados)

Molten Systems SRL
         (a Corporation incorporated under the laws of Barbados)
<PAGE>   1

                              POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned, acting in the capacity or capacities stated with their
respective names below, hereby constitute and appoint DAVID FREMED AND HARRY
RUBIN, and each of them severally, the attorneys-in-fact of the undersigned
with full power to them and each of them to sign for and in the name of the
undersigned in the capacities indicated below the Transitional Report on Form
10-K of Infogrames, Inc. for the three months ended June 30, 2000, and any
and all amendments thereto.

This Power of Attorney may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original, but which taken together shall constitute
one instrument.







/s/ Bruno Bonnell
---------------------------
      Bruno Bonnell            Chief Executive Officer       September 8, 2000
                                Officer and Director


/s/ Steven A. Denning                  Director              September 8, 2000
---------------------------
      Steven A. Denning


/s/ Denis Guyennot                     Director              September 8, 2000
---------------------------
      Denis Guyennot


/s/ Thomas A. Heymann                  Director              September 8, 2000
---------------------------
      Thomas A. Heymann

<PAGE>   2

/s/ Ann E. Kronen                      Director              September 8, 2000
---------------------------
      Ann E. Kronen


/s/ Thomas Schmider                    Director              September 8, 2000
---------------------------
      Thomas Schmider




                                       2
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

 

I,Gerald D. Putnam, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofArchipelago Holdings, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:

 

a)              Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably likelyto materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)              All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)             Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:   May 16, 2005 | /s/  Gerald D. Putnam                                |
|---------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                      | Gerald  D. Putnam                                    |
| * *                  | *Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive  Officer* |

 

1

----
<PAGE>

                         Hartford Capital Corporation         Exhibit 10v.

March 24, 2000

Board of Directors
Medcare Technologies, Inc.
1515 W. 22nd Street
Suite 1210
Oak Brook, IL 60523

Dear Sirs:

This letter is to confirm our understanding of the commitment of funds by
Hartford Capital ("Hartford Capital") to Medcare Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") if certain events occur. Hartford Capital agrees to purchase common
stock, par value $.001, of the Company from the Company at the then current
stock market price upon the request of the Board of Directors of the Company
following the occurrence of any of the following circumstances, and in the
following amounts:

  -  In the event of occurrence of an event occurring under Section 3(d)(iii) of
     the Series B Preferred Stock Certificate of Designation {the delisting
     call} which results in a demand for redemption of the Company's Series B
     Preferred Stock the Company may require Hartford Capital purchase enough
     common shares to fund any such redemption elected by Series B Preferred
     stockholders.

  -  In the event of certain transactions (each a "Major Transaction"): (i) the
     consolidation, merger or other business combination of the Company, (ii)
     the sale or transfer of all or substantially all of the Company's assets
     or (iii) a purchase, tender or exchange offer made to and accepted by the
     holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock,
     provided that such Major Transaction shall have occurred or have been the
     subject of a public announcement during the period beginning on May 18,
     1999 and ending May 18, 2000, the Company may require Hartford Capital to
     purchase enough common shares from the Company to fund any such redemption
     of the Company's Series B Preferred elected by Series B Preferred
     stockholders.

The above commitment is only valid while there are any shares of Series B
Preferred Stock outstanding. This commitment terminates upon the conversion into
common stock of all the outstanding Series B Preferred Stock and is contingent
upon the approval of the Company's Board of Directors.

Sincerely,
HARTFORD CAPITAL CORPORATION


By:   /s/ Harmel S. Rayat
    ------------------------
        Harmel S. Rayat
Exhibit 23.2




                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent  public  accountants,  we hereby consent to the  incorporation by
reference of our reports  dated  December 11, 1998,  included in this Form 10-K,
into the Company's previously  filed  Registration  Statements No. 333-59397 on
Form S-3 and No. 333-56591 on Form S-8.



                                                         /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                                         -----------------------
        
                                                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Portland, Oregon
December 22, 1998
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, W. Gordon Lancaster, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ivanhoe Energy
Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:  a.)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc.)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting;  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board
of directors:  a.)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb.)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. * * * Date: August 3, 2004 Chief Financial Officer By:
    
    /s/ W. Gordon LancasterW. Gordon Lancaster
9157

#### SPENCE v. SOUTHERN RY. CO.

(85 S. E. 1058.)

Commerce. State Regulation. Overcharge for. Freight. Adjustment of Claim. — The penalty prescribed by Civil Code 1912, sec. 2573, for failure to adjust claims for overcharge on freight within a specified time is inapplicable to interstate shipments.

Before Moore, J., Chester,

July, 1914.

Reversed *nisi.*

Action by William Spence against Southern Railway Company. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

*Messrs. J. E. Hemphill*and *B. L,. Abney,*for appellant,

submit: *Remedies provided by act of Congress exclusive:*74 S. C. 981; 112 Red. 823; 15 I. C. C. 37; Barnes’ Transportation 608; 226 U. S. 491; 98 S. C. 470.

*Messrs. Marion & Marion,*for respondent,

submit: *Exception too general:*48 S. C. 323; 46 S. C. 17; 49 S. C. 304; 88 S. C. 80; 63 S. C. 529; 78 S. C. 5.19; 65 S. C. 242. *No conflict between State and Federal statutes:*222 U. S. 436; 98 S. C. 63; 225 U. S. 501; 187 U. S. 148. -

August 12, 1915.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Hydrick.

Plaintiff, recovered judgment in a magistrate’s Court for $6.20, an admitted overcharge in the rate on an interstate shipment, and $50.00, the penalty provided by statute (Civil Code 1912, vol. I, sec. 2573) for failure to pay the claim therefor within the time prescribed. The Circuit Court affirmed the judgment.

Since the trial on Circuit the Supreme Court of the United States has held that the penalty statute is void as applied to interstate commerce. *Charleston & W. C. Ry. Co.*v. *Varnville Furniture Co.,*237 U. S. 597; 35 Sup. Ct. *437715; 100 S. C. 227a. The penalty must, therefore, be remitted. If this is done within twenty days after notice of the filing of the remittitur, the judgment will stand affirmed; otherwise a new trial is ordered.

Reversed *nisi.*
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Irving Mizell, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

February 4, 1988

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*William L. Murphy, District Attorney (Yolanda L. Rudick*of counsel), for appellant. *Philip L. Weinstein*and *Leslie Crary*for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order affirmed.

The information in the case at bar charged the defendant with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, alleging that he possessed two vials containing "cocaine, crack.” The court below dismissed the information *287upon receipt of a laboratory report indicating that the vials contained only a "residue”.

While the Legislature has not required proof of a minimum quantity for the offense in question *(see, People v Schunk,*NYLJ, Jan. 15, 1987, at 12, col 1 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]), it is our opinion that proof of only a nonquantifiable amount of a controlled substance is insufficient, without more to support a conviction for criminal possession of the substance *(see, People v Baker,*7 AD2d 707; *see also, People v Mason,*136 Misc 2d 968; *People v Ifill,*137 Misc 2d 14; *People v Shelton,*136 Misc 2d 644). While circumstantial evidence may remedy the defect and establish a prima facie case, the information fails to allege any additional factual data beyond that previously set forth. It is therefore facially insufficient. Since the failure of an information to allege a prima facie case is a nonwaivable jurisdictional defect *(People v Alejandro,*70 NY2d 133), the fact that defendant did not comply with provisions of CPL 170.45 requiring notice and writing, is of no moment.

Kassoff, P. J., and Pizzuto, J., concur; Kellam, J., taking no part.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Orchid BioSciences, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (the
Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Dated: November 13, 2003 |  | /s/ Paul J. Kelly                         
|------------------------ |  | ------------------------------------------
|                         |  | Paul J. Kelly, M.D.                       
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer                   
|                         | 
|Dated: November 13, 2003 |  | /s/ Michael E. Spicer                     
|                         |  | Michael E. Spicer                         
|                         |  | Vice President and Chief Financial 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.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Hercules Offshore, Inc. and The Hercules Offshore Drilling Company,

LLC v. Excell Crane & Hydraulics, Inc.

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00817

- CV

Trial court case number: 2009

- 49993

Trial court: 133rd District Court of Harris County

Appellee Excell Crane & Hydraulics, Inc. has filed an Opposed Motion for Leave to

Supplement Appellee Brief. Appellants Hercules Offshore, Inc. and The Hercules Offshore

Drilling Comp any, LLC have filed a response. We GRANT the motion for leave to file the

supplemental brief.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 7 , 2014