alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 Amendment No. 1
to
 FORM 10-Q
 QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009
 Commission File No: 0-27848
 BIOFIELD CORP.
  Delaware
    
    13-3703450(State of other jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
    
    (Employer Identification Number)1615 Walnut Street, 3 rd Floor, Philadelphia, PA
    
    19102(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 
 þ o
 o þ
  Large Accelerated Filer o
Accelerated Filer oNon-Accelerated Filer o(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller Reporting Company þ o þ
 AS OF JULY 31, 2009, THERE WERE 38,886,833 SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OUTSTANDING AND 12,300,000 SHARES
OF VOTING PREFERRED STOCK OUTSTANDING.




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  BIOFIELD CORP.Date:  December 22, 2009
    By:
    /s/  David Bruce HongDavid Bruce HongChief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/  David Bruce HongDavid Bruce HongChief Financial Officer
No. 11-10338.

#### Walker *v.*Ochoa, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brett D. Davis, certify that:

 

1.                                      I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2014-C (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.                                      Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.                                      I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.                                      All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A.

 

----

 

March 30, 2015

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Brett D. Davis                                             |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Brett   D. Davis                                                 |
|   | Title: | President   (senior officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         417,000
<SECURITIES>                                   201,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,096,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    21,000
<INVENTORY>                                    496,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,319,000
<PP&E>                                       1,981,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 580,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,832,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,276,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,248,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,832,000
<SALES>                                      4,274,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,274,000
<CGS>                                        2,528,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,999,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (21,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (232,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (232,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (232,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
DISMISS; Opinion issued April 9, 2013

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-12-00047-CV

CHIA I. LI, Appellant

V.

LISA ANN & ROBERT ENGLISH, Appellees

On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 199-01146-2009

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Lang, and Evans 

The Court has before it appellant’s March 18, 2013 unopposed motion to dismiss appeal 

and expedite the issuance of mandate. We GRANT the motion, DISMISS the appeal, and 

ORDER that the mandate issue on today’s date.

PER CURIAM

120047F.P05
1200047 li op.docx –2–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

CHIA I. LI, Appellant

No. 05-12-00047-CV V.

LISA ANN & ROBERT ENGLISH, 

Appellees

On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District 

Court, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 199-01146-2009.

Opinion delivered per curiam. Justices 

Francis, Lang, and Evans sitting for the 

Court.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. The 

parties are ORDERED to bear their own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered April 9, 2013.

/Molly Francis/

MOLLY FRANCIS

JUSTICE
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Anthony Andrew WESTERMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-30288

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 6, 2017 * Seattle, Washington

Filed December 08, 2017

*652Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, Chad Spraker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USHE—Office of the US Attorney, Helena, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Michael Donahoe, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FDMT-Federal Defenders of Montana (Helena), Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without Oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2),

MEMORANDUM **

The district court properly denied James Westermaris motion to dismiss his indictment for failure to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a).

Westermaris predicate offense—sexual battery in violation of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-5505(a)—is a sex offense for purposes of SORNA. *See*34 U.S.C. § 20911(1), (5)(A)(i). A sex offense is “a criminal offense that has an element involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another.” § 20911(5)(A)(i), “Sexual act” and “sexual contact” are undefined, so we use the “ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning of the statutory words.” *United States v. Sinerius,*504 F.3d 737, 740 (9th Cir. 2007) (quotation omitted). We are not persuaded that Congress intended “to import the elements of offenses delineated elsewhere in the U.S. Code,” *id.*at 743, and therefore decline to import the definitions of “sexual act” and “sexual contact” found in 18 U.S.C. § 2246(2), (3).

Sexual contact is an element of the Kansas sexual-battery statute. *See*Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-5505(a). The statute does not limit the “character of the touching” required to commit the offense, but it does require that the touching be conducted with sexual intent, therefore criminalizing sexual contact. *See United States v. Rocha-Alvarado,*843 F.3d 802, 808 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting *United States v. Baron-Medina,*187 F.3d 1144, 1147 (9th Cir. 1999)). The statute’s requirement that the offense be committed with sexual intent also defeats Westermaris argument that it is impossible to know whether his conviction “was entered on a plea of reckless or intentional *mens rea.”*Conduct committed “with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the offender or another,” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-5505(a), cannot be committed recklessly.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R, 36-3.
GERALD MCCLAREY

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 5475

________ _____________________/

Opinion filed February 10, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Mark W. Moseley , Judge

.

Gerald McClarey, pro se

, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Justin Chapman, Assistant Attorn ey

General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, CLARK, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.
#### PLASTIC-VIEW INTERNATIONAL, INC.; Plastic View ATC, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY; CP Films, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-55284

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted November 15, 2017 Pasadena, California

Filed December 13, 2017

Byron T. Ball, Attorney, The Ball Law Firm, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants

Daniel Sakaguchi, Alto Litigation, PC, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appel-lees

Before: NGUYEN and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and LOGAN,* District Judge.

*

The Honorable Steven Paul Logan, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Plastic-View International, Inc. and Plastic View ATC, Inc. (collectively “Plastic View”) appeal the district court’s order dismissing their second amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction *376under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review the district court’s order de novo. *Lloyd v. CVB Fin. Corp.,*811 F.3d 1200, 1205 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

1. In order to show that a contract existed between the parties, a plaintiff must plead “some basis for concluding that the parties engaged in a process of offer and acceptance, rather than inconclusive negotiations.” *Steiner v. Mobil Oil Corp.,*20 Cal.3d 90, 141 Cal.Rptr. 157, 569 P.2d 751, 760 (1977). At most, Eastman’s alleged emails amounted to an invitation for Plastic View to make an offer by ordering specific quantities of products. Price lists “are not ordinarily intended or understood as offers to sell.” *Restatement (Second) of Contracts*§ 26 (Am. Law Inst. 1981). Because Plastic View fails to plead “[cjonduct by both parties which recognizes the existence of a contract,” Cal. Com. Code § 2207(3), the district court properly dismissed its breach of contract claim.

2. Plastic View alleges that Eastman promised to supply window film and shade products, which Plastic View would resell to its customers, based on the parties’ business relationship of over fifty years. Even assuming that this history gave rise to' an implied distribution agreement, its terms would be “determined by the parties’ course of conduct.” *Varni Bros. Corp. v. Wine World, Inc.,*35 Cal.App.4th 880, 41 Cal.Rptr.2d 740, 745 (1995). Because the parties’ conduct did not suggest otherwise, any such implied agreement was terminable at will by either party. *See*Cal. Com. Code § 2309(2); *Unterberger v. Red Bull N.A., Inc.,*162 Cal.App.4th 414, 75 Cal.Rptr.3d 368, 373 (2008).

3. The district court properly dismissed Plastic View’s claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because the second amended complaint does not plead facts that establish “a contractual relationship between the parties.” *Smith v. City & Cty. of S.F.,*225 Cal.App.3d 38, 275 Cal.Rptr. 17, 23 (1990).

4.Plastic View’s claim for declaratory relief also fails because there is no “actual controversy” related to either • party’s rights under a contract. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2201.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
----

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement No. 333-234564 on Form F-10 of Organigram Holdings Inc. (the “Company”) and to the use of our reports dated November 24, 2019 relating to the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended August 31, 2019 and November 24, 2019 relating to the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended August 31, 2018 of the Company appearing in this Annual Report on Form 40-F.

*/s/ Deloitte LLP*

Chartered Professional Accountants      Moncton, Canada       November 26, 2019 

----
Brian Sandoval 

Governor 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Motor Carrier Division 

555 Wright Way 

Carson City, Nevada 89711-0600 

Telephone (775) 684-4711 

Fax Number (775) 684-4619 

www.dmvnv.com 

January 15, 2016 

Attention: Director, Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Gentlemen: 

Terri L. Albertson 

Director 

This letter is being sent as a follow-up to a recent telephone conversation between Dawn Lietz, 

Deputy Administrator, Motor Carrier Division, and Jim Brown of your office. This conversation 

was about the collection and distribution of aviation gasoline excise taxes in Nevada. 

Currently Nevada Revised Statutes impose a 2¢ per gallon state excise tax and a county option 

tax of up to 8¢ per gallon on all aviation gasoline sold. The 2¢ tax is collected on all state-wide 

taxable sales and the option tax is collected and distributed only to those counties that have 

enacted this tax, currently four (4) counties. 

The 2¢ tax is collected and transferred to the Civil Air Patrol account on a monthly basis and 

can only be used for the following: 

a. Carry out its search, rescue and emergency operations, homeland defense and 

narcotics interdiction missions; 

b. Maintain a headquarters; and 

c. Purchase, maintain and repair emergency and training equipment. 

No funds in the Civil Air Patrol account may be expended for: 

a. The purchase of any aircraft; 

b. Travel expenses, or 

c. Training expenses 

The county option tax is collected and distributed as follows: 

a. Governmental entity which operates the airport if the airport is operated by a 

governmental entity; 

b. Governmental entity which owns the airport if the airport is owned but not operated 

by a governmental entity 

c. County in which the airport is located if the airport is neither owned nor operated by a 

governmental entity. 

The funds received must be used by the governmental entity to pay the cost of: 

a. Transportation projects related to airports, including access on the ground to 

airports; 
b. Payment of principal and interest on notes, bonds or other obligations incurred to 

fund projects; 

c. Promoting the use of an airport to increase the number and availability of flights at 

the airport; 

d. Contributing to the Trust Fund for Aviation; 

e. Any combination of those purposes. 

If you have any questions about the collection and distribution of Nevada's aviation gasoline 

excise taxes, please contact me at (775) 684-4626. 

Sincerely, 

Deputy 

~11 Administrator 

Motor Carrier Division 

DL/cs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

BRIAN J. LYSZKOWSKI,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 497 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of November, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED.
----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3705 — Kohlberg Kravis Roberts/Masonite International)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2005/C 21/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

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

(2)  Available on DG COMP website:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

----
# C_2015407EN.01000101.xml

| 8.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 407/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 407/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7840 — LetterOne Holdings/E.ON E&P Norge)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 407/01)

On 2 December 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 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 32015M7840. 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 32015M7840. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 238

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for a

National Race for the Cure.breast cancer survivors event sponsored by the
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 238

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

•HCON 238 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF BREAST CANCER SUR2 VIVORS EVENT ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

3 The National Race for the Cure (referred to in this

4 resolution as the ‘‘Race’’) may sponsor a public event on

5 the Capitol Grounds on April 1, 1998, or on such other

6 date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives and

7 the President pro tempore of the Senate may jointly des8 ignate.

9 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—The event to be carried out under

11 this resolution shall be—

12 (1) free of admission charge to the public; and

13 (2) arranged not to interfere with the needs of

14 Congress and under conditions to be prescribed by

15 the Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

16 Board.

17 (b) RESPONSIBILITY.—The Race shall assume full re18 sponsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident to all

19 activities associated with the event.

20 SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

21 For the purposes of this resolution, the Race may

22 erect upon the Capitol Grounds, subject to the approval

23 of the Architect of the Capitol, such stage, sound amplifi24 cation devices, commemorative pink ribbon, and other re25 lated structures and equipment as may be required for the

26 event to be carried out under this resolution.
3

•HCON 238 EH

1 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

2 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

3 Board may make any such additional arrangements that

4 may be required to carry out the event under this resolu5 tion.

6 SEC. 5. APPLICABILITY OF PROHIBITIONS.

7 Nothing in this resolution may be construed to waive

8 the applicability of the prohibitions established by section

9 4 of the Act of July 31, 1946 (Chapter 707; 60 Stat. 718),

10 concerning sales, displays, and solicitations on the Capitol

11 Grounds.

Passed the House of Representatives March 17,

1998.

Attest:

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE YORK GROUP, INC. 1999 SECOND QUARTER REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        261
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                              36,515
<ALLOWANCES>                                4,219
<INVENTORY>                                36,115
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           76,401
<PP&E>                                     93,861
<DEPRECIATION>                             31,126
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            215,850
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      39,213
<BONDS>                                    71,845
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       89
<OTHER-SE>                                 88,692
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              215,850
<SALES>                                   104,782
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          104,782
<CGS>                                      71,138
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              71,138
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          2,712
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             7,307
<INCOME-TAX>                                2,989
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         4,318
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                4,318
<EPS-BASIC>                                0.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0.48


</TABLE>