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


    <ARTICLE>                                                   5
    <LEGEND>
            THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE 6/27/99 CONDENSED  CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                         1000

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                       JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                         JUN-27-1999
<CASH>                                  41797
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                           13232
<ALLOWANCES>                             1495
<INVENTORY>                              5864
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        72010
<PP&E>                                  14008
<DEPRECIATION>                           6260
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          86296
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   18010
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                  291
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                              67867
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            86296
<SALES>                                 15209
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        15209
<CGS>                                    4769
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            4769
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        14141
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          3
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (3054)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (3054)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                            (3054)
<EPS-BASIC>                           (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (0.10)



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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,045,888
<SECURITIES>                                 7,048,247
<RECEIVABLES>                                  912,473
<ALLOWANCES>                                    84,500
<INVENTORY>                                    357,740
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,446,011
<PP&E>                                       3,816,952
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,201,377
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,134,447
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,117,467
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            85
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,016,895
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,134,447
<SALES>                                      1,687,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,687,305
<CGS>                                        1,558,283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,558,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,755,395
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,266,764)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,266,764)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.09)
        

</TABLE>
Continuing Abatement Order filed October 15, 2015 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00256-CR

____________

ULESSIA PROCTER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 208th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1372857

CONTINUING ABATEMENT ORDER

On August 5, 2015, this court directed the trial court to conduct a hearing in 

this case to determine whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and, if so, 

whether appellant is indigent and, thus entitled to a free record and appointed 

counsel on appeal. Our order required the trial judge to see that a record of the 

hearing is made, make findings of fact and conclusions of law, and order the trial 

clerk to forward a record of the hearing and a supplemental clerk’s record 

containing the findings and conclusions. The transcribed record of the hearing and
the courts findings and conclusions were to be filed with the clerk of this court on 

or before September 8, 2015. To date, the court has not received the record or 

findings. 

We therefore ORDER the judge of the 208th District Court to immediately 

conduct a hearing at which appellant, appellant’s counsel, if any, and counsel for 

the State shall participate, either in person or by video teleconference, to determine 

whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and, if so, whether appellant is 

indigent and, thus entitled to a free record and appointed counsel on appeal. The 

judge may appoint appellate counsel for appellant if necessary. The judge shall see 

that a record of the hearing is made, shall make findings of fact and conclusions of 

law, and shall order the trial clerk to forward a record of the hearing and a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings and conclusions. The 

transcribed record of the hearing, the court’s findings and conclusions, and a 

videotape or compact disc, if any, containing a recording of the video 

teleconference shall be filed with the clerk of this court within thirty days of the 

date of this order.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s 

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the 

trial court’s findings and recommendations are filed in this court. The court will 

also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party. It 

is the responsibility of any party seeking reinstatement to request a hearing date 

from the trial court and to schedule a hearing in compliance with this court’s order. 

If the parties do not request a hearing, the court coordinator of the trial court shall 

set a hearing date and notify the parties of such date.

It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
#### TEO, ULUFALE and AUALA, Plaintiffs v. SIATAFU and FAUOLO, Defendants

No. 4-1915

High Court of American Samoa Civil Jurisdiction, Trial Division [Land: “Laumaala”]

December 23, 1921

SYDNEY D. HALL, *Associate Judge of the High Court*

JUDGMENT

This cause coming on to be heard before Sydney D. Hall, Associate Judge of the High Court of American Samoa, and being heard and it appearing to the court that the matters in controversy had been amicably settled between the parties plaintiff and defendant, and it is therefore ordered, considered and adjudged that this action be dismissed, and “Laumaala” has been amicably divided among those named.

It is further ordered, considered and adjudged by the Court that the plaintiff pay the costs of this action $10.00.

Given under my hand and seal of the High Court of American Samoa this 23rd day of December, 1921.
#### Carl E. MCADOO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, (Department of Veterans Affairs) in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Dr. Ernest T. Ahl, Jr., in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Dr. Sonny W. Tucker, Jr., in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Sandy F. Pierce, Physician Assistant, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Rutherford County Department of Social Services, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; John Carroll, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Vic Martin, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Ann Padgett, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally; Joyce Ann Nash, in Official and Personal Capacity, sued Jointly and Severally, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-1549

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: August 24, 2017

Decided: August 28, 2017

Carl E. McAdoo, Appellant Pro Se. Gill Paul Beck, Sr., Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; Sean Francis Perrin, WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; John E. Rogers, II, WARD LAW FIRM, PA, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carl E. McAdoo appeals from the district court’s orders granting the Defen*646dants’ motions to dismiss his complaint alleging various civil rights violations related to the death and estate of his father. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *McAdoo v. United, States,*No. 1:14-cv-00239-MOC-DLH, 2015 WL 4757284 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 12, 2015; Apr. 4, 2017). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
#### William W. SPENCER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James N. MATTIS, Secretary of Defense, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-2044

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 26, 2017

Decided: April 27, 2017

Donna Williams Rucker, TULLY RINCKEY, PLLC, Washington, D.C.,' for Appellant. Chad A. Readier, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Charles W. Scarborough, Weili J. Shaw, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William W. Spencer, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his employment discrimination complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Spencer v. Mattis,*No. 8:16-cv-00161-PX (D. Md. Aug. 11, 2016). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
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 Annual Report of
RFG Acquisition II Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard F. Beston, Jr., certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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; 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/
      Richard F. Beston, Jr.Richard
      F. Beston, Jr.Principal
      Executive OfficerMarch
      6,
2009
Roger James SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-81

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 15, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
14371

#### KERR v. CLEVELAND

(188 S. E., 370)

*32
      *Messrs. A. C. Platt*and *I. C. Wrightson,*for appellant,

*Messrs. Perrin &*Tinsley, for respondent,

November 7, 1936.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Boni-iam.

The Court is in full accord with the findings and conclusions reached by Judge Merchant of the Spartanburg County Court, before whom the rule to show cause was heard. Accordingly, the exceptions are overruled, and the order appealed from is affirmed.

Let it be reported.

Mr. Chief Justice Stabler, Messrs, Justices Fisitburne and Baker and Mr. Acting Associate Justice A. L. Gaston concur.
Exhibit 4.11
 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
     1. Amendment
  2. Miscellaneous.
 (a)
    
    Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the law
of the State of New York, USA.
 (b)
    
    Effect of Amendment. Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, the Agreement remains
in full force and effect according to its terms. Except as specifically provided in this
Amendment, nothing contained in this Amendment is intended to affect the parties existing or
continuing rights or obligations under the Agreement, as modified hereby.
 (d)
    
    Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed
an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.
 [signature page follows]




---



##### 



JASON XIANGXIN ZONG/s/ Jason Xiangxin ZongHOME INNS & HOTELS MANAGEMENT INC.By:
    /s/ Jian SunName:
    Jian SunTitle:
    CEO  2
#### George Benjamin, Overseer, Resp’t, v. John Monroe, App’lt.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
# Europeiska unionens C 19A/2014

| | ISSN 1977-1061
  doi:10.3000/19771061.CA2014.019.swe |
| --- | --- |
| Europeiska unionens
  officiella tidning | C 19A |
| | |
| Svensk utgåva | Meddelanden och upplysningar | 57 årgången22 januari 2014 |

ISSN 1977-1061

doi:10.3000/19771061.CA2014.019.swe

Europeiska unionens

officiella tidning

C 19A

Svensk utgåva

Meddelanden och upplysningar

57 årgången22 januari 2014

---

| Informationsnummer | Innehållsförteckning | Sida |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Yttranden |
| | ADMINISTRATIVA FÖRFARANDEN |
| | Europeiska läkemedelsmyndigheten |
| 2014/C 019A/01 | Meddelande om avbrytande av uttagningsförfarande | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Innehållsförteckning

Sida

V   Yttranden

ADMINISTRATIVA FÖRFARANDEN

Europeiska läkemedelsmyndigheten

2014/C 019A/01

Meddelande om avbrytande av uttagningsförfarande

1

SAMMANSTÄLLNING ÖVER EUT C A, UTTAGNINGSPROV

Nedan följer en förteckning över de EUT C A som publicerats under innevarande år.

Om inte annat anges nedan har EUT kommit ut i samtliga språkversioner.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |

5

6

11

19

| SV | |
| --- | --- |

SV

---

V Yttranden

ADMINISTRATIVA FÖRFARANDEN

Europeiska läkemedelsmyndigheten

| 22.1.2014 | SV | Europeiska unionens officiella tidning | CA 19/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2014

SV

Europeiska unionens officiella tidning

CA 19/1

---

Meddelande om avbrytande av uttagningsförfarande

(2014/C 19 A/01)

Europeiska läkemedelsmyndigheten har beslutat att avbryta följande uttagningsförfaranden:

| — | EMA/CA/S/039: Kontraktsanställd (korttidskontrakt), vetenskapligt stöd till europeiska övervakningen av veterinär användning av antimikrobiella medel (Esvac) (FG IV) (1) |
| --- | --- |

—

EMA/CA/S/039: Kontraktsanställd (korttidskontrakt), vetenskapligt stöd till europeiska övervakningen av veterinär användning av antimikrobiella medel (Esvac) (FG IV) (1)

| — | EMA/CA/S/040: Kontraktsanställd (korttidskontrakt), vetenskapliga sekretariatet för Europeiska kommissionens yttranden om antimikrobiell resistens, avdelningen för veterinärmedicin (FG IV) (2) |
| --- | --- |

—

EMA/CA/S/040: Kontraktsanställd (korttidskontrakt), vetenskapliga sekretariatet för Europeiska kommissionens yttranden om antimikrobiell resistens, avdelningen för veterinärmedicin (FG IV) (2)

---

(1)  EUT C 320 A, 6.11.2013, s. 2.

(2)  Se fotnot 1.

---
<PAGE>



                                     EXHIBIT 21
                         SCHEDULE OF REGISTRANT'S SUBSIDIARIES

NAME                                            JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
ATG Securities Corporation                      United States
ATG Global, Inc.                                United States
Art Technology Group B.V.                       Netherlands
Art Technology Group GmbH                       Germany
Art Technology Group (Europe) Limited           United Kingdom
Art Technology Group Australia Pty Limited      Australia
Art Technology Group (Canada) Inc.              Canada
Art Technology Group Canada ULC                 Canada
Art Technology Group, S.A.R.L.                  France
Art Technology Group HK Limited                 Hong Kong
Art Technology Group, KK                        Japan
ATG E-Business Solutions PTE LTD                Singapore
# U n i te d S t a t e s C o u r t o f A p pe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-5097 September Term, 2022 1: 13-c v -003 28-A BJ Filed O n: July 25, 2 023 Lau ra J. Ra mo s,

App ellant
v . Merrick B. Garlan d, in his o f f icial capa city

as Atto rney Gene ral of

the United Sta tes, App ellee
BEFORE: Sriniv asan , Chief Jud ge; W ilkins and Pa n, Circuit Ju dges 

# UN DERSEA L OP INIO N NO T AVAILA BLE TO P UB LIC
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-05-00828-CV

Retha Abernathy, Appellant

v.

Drake Borer, M.D., Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN503796, HONORABLE MARGARET A. COOPER, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal, informing that they have

settled their dispute. The appeal is dismissed on the joint motion and costs are assessed against the

party incurring them.

 

Bea Ann Smith, Justice

Before Justices B. A. Smith, Puryear and Waldrop

Dismissed on Joint Motion

Filed: March 20, 2006
Exhibit
      32.2





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 Capital Corp of the West (the "Company")
      on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, R.
      Dale
      McKinney, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify, 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) 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.








Date:
                November 3, 2005
            By/s/
                R. Dale McKinneyR.
                Dale McKinneyExecutive
                Vice President and
              Chief
                Financial Officer




Return
      to Form 10-Q
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Julio Cesar BOCHAS, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-20446 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed May 18, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Julio Cesar Bochas, Pro Se

Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Julio Cesar Bochas has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), *360and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (6th Cir. 2011). Bochas has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions pf the record reflected therein. We agree with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cm. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Converted by EDGARwiz


Exhibit 4.13
















CONSENT OF ISABELLE ROY







Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended February 29, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) of Virginia Mines Inc. (the “Company”), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.




I, Isabelle Roy, participated in the preparation of the technical report entitled “Rapport technique et recommandations, Campagne d’exploration 2011, Projet Nichicun, Mines Virginia inc.”, completed in May 2012; (the “Report”), concerning mineralized material in the Nichicun property for the Company. Portions of the Report are summarized under headings “Item III – Description of the Business – 3.3.4 Geological Setting; 3.3.5 Exploration and Drilling; and 3.3.6 Mineralization” in the Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended February 29, 2012 (included as Exhibit 1 of the Annual Report, which Exhibit is incorporated by reference herein). 




I hereby consent to the inclusion of the foregoing written disclosure and to the references to such disclosure and to my name under the foregoing heading and to all other references to such disclosure and to my name included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report.







Very truly yours,










	
	/s/  Isabelle Roy


	Name:  Isabelle Roy, B.Sc., P.Geo.



















May 14, 2012
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 28, 2011 

p1219 

Order 

 

December 28, 2011 

143697 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 14 3697 

 COA: 297672 

 Oakland CC: 2009-229892-FC 

MICHAEL LEE MASSEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 26, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.