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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT MARCH 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       5,432,167
<SECURITIES>                                 4,160,301
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,057,850
<PP&E>                                         473,248<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,267,173
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,298,249
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,030
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,958,894
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,267,173
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,975,600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,817,633)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (2,817,633)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,817,633)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.28)
<FN>
<F1>PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIMENT IS REPORTED NET OF ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION OF
1,435,196.
</FN>
        

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


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              OCT-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 NOV-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                              25,652
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,310,120
<ALLOWANCES>                                       232,210
<INVENTORY>                                      1,640,847
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,905,332
<PP&E>                                           3,923,857
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,023,920
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,082,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,446,725
<BONDS>                                          3,348,867
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             4,000
<OTHER-SE>                                         205,092
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,082,692
<SALES>                                         10,065,011
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,065,011
<CGS>                                            8,427,225
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,427,225
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,062,141
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     5,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 148,363
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    422,282
<INCOME-TAX>                                       157,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                265,282
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       265,282
<EPS-BASIC>                                            .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 94-7481
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STACEY LAMAR MARSH, Defendant - Appellant.
No. 98-6408
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STACEY LAMAR MARSH, Defendant - Appellant.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-114, CA-94-399-3) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 22, 19982 Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HALL and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stacey Lamar Marsh, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998)). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Marsh , Nos. CR-91-114; CA-94-399-3 (S.D.W. Va. Nov. 2, 1994, and Feb. 5, 1998). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320 (1997). Further, we deny as moot Appellant’s motionsto amend or supplement his § 2255 motion, to place appeal in abeyance, and for other general relief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2010/2004

of 24 November 2004         

laying down the reduction coefficient to be applied under tariff subquota II for common wheat of a quality other than high quality opened by Regulation (EC) No 2375/2002

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2375/2002 of 27 December 2002 opening and providing for the administration of Community tariff quotas for common wheat of a quality other than high quality from third countries and derogating from Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 (2), and in particular Article 5(3) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Each application for an import licence for subquota II for common wheat of a quality other than high quality lodged and forwarded to the Commission on 22 November 2004 in accordance with Article 5(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 2375/2002 shall be accepted at a rate of 16,1214 % of the quantity applied for.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 November 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 November 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

(2)OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 88. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1111/2003 (OJ L 158, 27.6.2003, p. 21).

----
#### Wesley Leon BETHEA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Detective David Chad ELLIS; Detective Jason Corprew; Officer Jesse Emory; Sergeant Reginald Branch; Officer Norma Ruiz; Detective David Stancil; Officer David Seagroves; Officer Russell Winstead; Sergeant Steve Stroud; Wilson Police Department; City of Wilson; C. Bruce Rose, Mayor of the City of Wilson; Thomas P. Hopkins, Police Chief, City of Wilson, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-2065

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 15, 2018

Decided: February 16, 2018

Wesley Leon Bethea, Appellant Pro Se. James P. Cauley III, Gabriel Du Sablón, CAULEY PRIDGEN, PA, Wilson, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Wesley Leon Bethea appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants on his claim for malicious prosecution. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. *See*4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Bethea’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, namely that the false statements at issue were not material to the determination of probable cause, Bethea has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. *See Williams v. Giant Food*
      *174
      *Inc,,*370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court’s judgment. 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*
# Official Journal C 137/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 137 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4910 June 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 137

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4910 June 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 137/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2006/C 137/2 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4203 — Bayerngas/Deutsche Essent/Novogate JV) (1) | 2 |
| 2006/C 137/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4251 — Berkshire/Iscar Metalworking Companies) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 3 |
| 2006/C 137/4 | Invitation to submit comments on the draft Commission Regulation on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid | 4 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 137/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2006/C 137/2

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4203 — Bayerngas/Deutsche Essent/Novogate JV) (1)

2

2006/C 137/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4251 — Berkshire/Iscar Metalworking Companies) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

3

2006/C 137/4

Invitation to submit comments on the draft Commission Regulation on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid

de minimis

4

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 27 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 27

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the importance of African-American music to global culture 
 and calling on the people of the United States to study, reflect on, 
                 and celebrate African-American music.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 27

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas artists, songwriters, producers, engineers, educators, executives, and 
        other professionals in the music industry provide inspiration and 
        leadership through their creation of music, dissemination of educational 
        information, and financial contributions to charitable and community-
        based organizations;
Whereas African-American music is indigenous to the United States and originates 
        from African genres of music;
Whereas African-American genres of music such as gospel, blues, jazz, rhythm and 
        blues, rap, and hip-hop have their roots in the African-American 
        experience;
Whereas African-American music has a pervasive influence on dance, fashion, 
        language, art, literature, cinema, media, advertisements, and other 
        aspects of culture;
Whereas the prominence of African-American music in the 20th century has 
        reawakened interest in the legacy and heritage of the art form of 
        African-American music;
Whereas African-American music embodies the strong presence of, and significant 
        contributions made by, African-Americans in the music industry and 
        society as a whole;
Whereas the multibillion dollar African-American music industry contributes 
        greatly to the domestic and worldwide economy; and
Whereas African-American music has a positive impact on and broad appeal to 
        diverse groups, both nationally and internationally: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) recognizes the importance of the contributions of 
        African-American music to global culture and the positive 
        impact of African-American music on global commerce; and
            (2) calls on the people of the United States to take the 
        opportunity to study, reflect on, and celebrate the majesty, 
        vitality, and importance of African-American music.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 13, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 32.2



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



Securities and Exchange Commission



450 Fifth Street, N.W



Washington, D.C. 20549



Ladies and Gentlemen:



The certification set forth below is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and with Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.



Blair Mills, the Chief Financial Officer of Broadcaster, Inc, certifies 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 Broadcaster, Inc.



Dated: November 20, 2006



By:/s/ BLAIR MILLS

Blair Mills

Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
#### Eric E. MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of VIRGINIA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-2321

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 22, 2018

Decided: February 26, 2018

Eric E. Miller, Appellant Pro Se.

Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eric E. Miller seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint without prejudice. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Miller seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc.,*807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015); *Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 393,*10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
CAS IES SANITIZED
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

**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 International Game Technology PLC (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the Company does hereby certify, to its 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 results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| By:    | /s/   Marco Sala          |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   | Marco   Sala              |   |
|   | Chief   Executive Officer |   |

 

 

Dated May 15, 2015

 

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to International Game Technology PLC and will be retained by International Game Technology PLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

FEB 18 1999

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

JAMES R. KILGORE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 98-1352

v. (D.C. No. 98-D-1371)

DONICE NEAL, Warden; CATHIE

HOLST, Legal Supervisor; MIKE

VETRANO, Legal Assist; and SAUL

TRUJILLO, Chairman Parole Board,

(D. Colo.)

Defendants-Appellees.

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before TACHA, McKAY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

After examining Plaintiff-Appellant’s briefs and the appellate record, this

panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist

the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R.

34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claimed that several of
-2-

his constitutional rights were violated: He was denied parole for exercising his

First Amendment rights; he was denied due process and equal protection at a

parole hearing; and he has been denied access to the courts, which he claims also

violated his rights of equal protection and due process. The district court

dismissed Plaintiff’s claim of right of access to the courts as legally frivolous

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Additionally, the court dismissed without

prejudice Plaintiff’s claim that he was unconstitutionally denied parole because it

is not cognizable under section 1983 pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.

477, 486-87 (1994), and Crow v. Penry, 102 F.3d 1086, 1087 (10th Cir. 1996).

After reviewing Plaintiff’s briefs and the record, we conclude that the

district court did not err in determining that Plaintiff failed to state a claim under

section 1983. The court properly dismissed Plaintiff’s claim of access to the

courts and properly dismissed without prejudice his denial of parole claims. 

Accordingly, we affirm the decisions of the district court for substantially the

same reasons stated in the court’s Order filed August 28, 1998.

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge
Converted by EDGARwiz


AGREEMENT

The Agreement (the “Agreement”) is between NutraFuels, Inc. (the “Company”) and Neil Catania (the “Executive”) and made on October 9, 2017.

RECITALS:

WHEREAS, the Executive has rendered valuable services to the Company as its Vice President.

WHEREAS, the Company desires to award the Executive certain of its common shares for the services he rendered to the Company.

WHEREAS, the Executive desires to receive the Shares as compensation as set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein set forth, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. The term (the “Term”) of employment of Executive by the Company was January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016.

2. The Company shall pay to Executive two million shares (2,000,000) of common stock as payment for the services which upon issue on December 1, 20116 were validly issued fully paid and non-assessible shares.




3. Executive acknowledges he is not owed any additional compensation for the period of the Term.




Agreed and accepted.




NutraFuels, Inc.




By: /s/ Edgar Ward 

    Edgar Ward, Chief Executive Officer




Executive




By: /s/ Neil Catania

     Neil Catania
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-19-00316-CV

In the interest of A. G. and C.M.G., Children

On Appeal from the

398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. F-4874-18-I

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant, Arthur Fred Garza.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

September 19, 2019