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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE REPORT
ON FORM 10-Q OF BAYOU INTERNATIONAL, LTD. FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                1,000
<CURRENCY>                             AUSTRALIAN DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  .7901
<CASH>                                             113
<SECURITIES>                                         3
<RECEIVABLES>                                       54
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   170
<PP&E>                                              52
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     622
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              305
<BONDS>                                          2,289
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,388
<OTHER-SE>                                    (11,360)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       622
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     5
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   215
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (241)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (241)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (374)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 104 Received in Senate (RDS)]







105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 104

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1998, and 
                          for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 9, 1997

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION


 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1998, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That section 106(3) of Public 
Law 105-46 is further amended by striking ``November 9, 1997'' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``November 10, 1997'', and each provision 
amended by sections 122 and 123 of such public law shall be applied as 
if ``November 10, 1997'' was substituted for ``October 23, 1997''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 9, 1997.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.`
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CPS Technologies Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended April 2, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Grant C. Bennett, President and Treasurer 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 to the best of 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.

Date:	May 13, 2011
/s/	Grant C. Bennett
Grant C. Bennett
President and Treasurer
Addendum No. 3







Dated December 12, 2017 to that certain consulting agreement originally dated as of the 1st day of September 2015 and as extended for one (1) year by Addendum No. 1 dated 01.03.2016 and for another year by Addendum No. 2 dated 01.03.2017 by and between HCi Viocare, a Nevada corporation, having a registered office at 123 W. Nye Lane, Suite 129, Carson City, NV 89706, U.S.A. (the "Company") and Sergios Katsaros, resident of 8 Kehagia St., Filothei 15237, Greece, (the "Consultant"), hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement".







In accordance with Item 2. – Subsection 2.1 to the Agreement, the Company hereby extends the Term of the Agreement for a period of three (3) year starting on 02.01.2018 and ending on 01.01.2021.







The Item 3. – Subsection 3.1 to the Agreement, shall be amended as follows:







3.1 During the Term the Consultant shall receive cash compensation of the amount of three thousand five hundred Euros (3,500.00 €) per month (the "Consultant's Fee"). The Consultant shall be entitled to a 100% bonus of the total annual compensation, for every year that the company is profitable during the term. The Consultant is entitled to acquire at his discretion 10,000,000 shares of the common stock at a price of $0.05 (five cents) for a term of five (5) years. 







All other terms and conditions as contained in the Agreement remain in full force and effect.


 


This Addendum No. 3 shall be appended to and form a part of the Agreement and shall become effective on January 2, 2018.


 


	
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Addendum No. 3 to be duly executed and delivered as of the day and year first written above.















	
 


The Company 


 


 


/s/Sotirios Leontaritis  


HCi Viocare


By its President


Sotirios Leontaritis


 


 

	
 


The Consultant


 


 


/s/Sergios Katsaros  


Sergios Katsaros
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8276 

AN ACT 

To authorize the President to posthumously award the Medal 

of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for acts of valor during 

Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 8276 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD MEDAL OF HONOR 

2 TO SERGEANT FIRST CLASS ALWYN C. CASHE 

3 FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING OPERATION 

4 IRAQI FREEDOM. 

5 (a) WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—Notwith6 standing the time limitations specified in section 7274 of 

7 title 10, United States Code, or any other time limitation 

8 with respect to the awarding of certain medals to persons 

9 who served in the Armed Forces, the President may award 

10 the Medal of Honor under section 7271 of such title to 

11 Sergeant First Class Alwyn C. Cashe for the acts of valor 

12 described in subsection (b). 

13 (b) ACTS OF VALOR DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor 

14 referred to in subsection (a) are the actions of Sergeant 

15 First Class Alwyn C. Cashe on October 17, 2005, as a 

16 member of the Army serving in Iraq in support of Oper17 ation Iraqi Freedom, for which he was posthumously 

18 awarded the Silver Star. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 22, 

2020. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8276 

AN ACT 

To authorize the President to posthumously award 

of valor during Operation Iraqi Freedom. the Medal of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for acts
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bradley Ray SARGENT, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11610 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 20, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Bradley Ray Sargent, Pro Se

Before JONES, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Bradley Ray Sargent 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), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Sargent has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur 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.
#### PNC BANK v. WITTKOFSKI, J.

1477 WDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/12/2017

Reargument Denied 11/17/2017

GD 15-020182 (Allegheny)

Affirmed
#### ASSE INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rex TILLERSON, Secretary of State of the United States; United States Department of State; Jennifer Zimdahl Galt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Private Sector Exchange, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-56742

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 9, 2018 * San Francisco, California

Filed January 12, 2018

Ira J. Kurzban, Edward Fortunato Ramos, Kurzban Kurzban Weinger Tetzeli & Pratt P.A., Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Alisa Beth Klein, Nicolas Y. Riley, Attorney, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: D.W. NELSON, BYBEE, and IKUTA Circuit Judges.

*

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

*487MEMORANDUM **

ASSE International, Inc., appeals the district court’s denial of interim attorney’s fees and costs. “Generally the grant or denial of interim attorney’s fees by a district court pending litigation on the merits is not a final appealable order for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1291.” *Thompson v. Potashnick Constr. Co.,*812 F.2d 574, 576 (9th Cir. 1987); *see also Webb v. Ada County,*195 F.3d 524, 526 (9th. Cir. 1999) (“Interim awards of attorney’s fees made prior to a final judgment on the merits are generally not; appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.”); *Gates v. Rowland,*39 F.3d 1439, 1450 (9th Cir. 1994) (“Interim attorneys’ fees awards ... prior to entry of a final judgment on the merits are not appealable under section 1291.”). We see no reason to depart from this general rule, where the underlying litigation regarding the State Department’s sanction is ongoing, and indeed, ASSE concedes it may move for additional fees in the future. Nor does the collateral order doctrine apply, given that the “fee award itself determines neither the total amount of fees” due to ASSE nor ASSE’s “absolute entitlement to attorney’s fees,” *Rosenfeld v. United States,*859 F.2d 717, 720 (9th Cir. 1988), and the fee award is not “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.” *Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay,*437 U.S. 463, 468, 98 S.Ct. 2454, 57 L.Ed.2d 351 (1978).

Accordingly, Appeal No. 16-56742 is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

**

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

                                                                    Exhibit 23.4


                  [LEE KEELING AND ASSOCIATES, INC. LETTERHEAD]

                   CONSENT OF LEE KEELING AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

As independent oil and gas consultants, Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc. hereby
consents to the incorporation by reference in the Chesapeake Energy Corporation
Registration Statement on Form S-4 to be filed on or about April 7, 2003, of
information from our reserve report with respect to the oil and gas reserves of
Chesapeake Energy Corporation dated February 21, 2003 and entitled "Appraisal
Oil and Gas Properties Interests Owned by Chesapeake Energy Corporation Selected
Properties Constant Prices and Expenses Effective Date January 1, 2003." We also
consent to the reference to us under the heading "Experts" in such Registration
Statement.

LEE KEELING AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

By: /s/ Kenneth Renberg
---------------------------------------
        Kenneth Renberg, Vice President

Tulsa, Oklahoma
April 4, 2003
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-60091

Summary Calendar

 

BENJAMIN EKENE NEZIANYA,

Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - -

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

A29-400745

- - - - - - - - - -

December 31, 1997

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Benjamin Ekene Nezianya petitions this court to review an

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his

appeal seeking reversal of an order of deportation issued against

him. The immigration judge issued the order of deportation based

on documentary evidence showing that Nezianya had violated his

nonimmigrant student status by engaging in unauthorized

employment, in violation of section 241(a)(1)(C)(i) of the

Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(1)(C)(i).
No. 97-60091

-2-

“An order of deportation . . . shall not be reviewed by any

court if the alien has not exhausted the administrative remedies

available to him as of right under the immigration laws and

regulations . . . .” 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c). As exhaustion of

remedies is statutorily-mandated, this court lacks subject-matter

jurisdiction to hear any unexhausted arguments. See Rodriguez v.

INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 (5th Cir. 1993); Townsend v. INS, 799 F.2d

179, 181 (5th Cir. 1986).

Nezianya argues that, although he may have been employed

subsequently, the Immigration and Naturalization Service failed

to prove that he was actually employed on June 4, 1991, as

charged in the Order to Show Cause. Nezianya further alleges

that he was a minor on June 4, 1991, and therefore lacked the

capacity to enter into an enforceable employment contract on that

date. Nezianya failed to raise both of these arguments in his

deportation hearing and his appeal to the BIA. As Nezianya

failed to exhaust all of the administrative remedies available to

him regarding these arguments, we lack subject-matter

jurisdiction over them and are precluded from considering them.

DISMISSED.
#### LI ZHANG, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 13-74452

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 19, 2018

Li Zhang, Pro Se

Lindsay Brooke Glauner, Esquire, Trial Attorney, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Li Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. *Shrestha v. Holder,*590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on omissions from Zhang’s declaration and direct testimony as to the harm she experienced in China and inconsistencies in her testimony as to her first trip to the United States. *See id.*at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under the totality of the circumstances). Zhang’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir, 2000). Substantial evidence also supports the .agency’s finding that Zhang’s corroborative evidence did not otherwise establish her eligibility for relief, *See Garcia v. Holder,*749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2014) (petitioner’s documentary evidence was insufficient to rehabilitate credibility or independently support claim). Thus, in the absence of credible testimony, in this case, Zhang’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. *See Huang v. Holder,*744 F.3d 1149, 1156 (9th Cir. 2014).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Zhang’s CAT claim because it was based on the same testimony found not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not Zhang would be tor*472tured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to China. *See id.*

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

   As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in this Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4
of our report dated March 5, 2002, included in Pennzoil-Quaker State Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, and to all
references to our Firm included in this Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
Statement.



                                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

/s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Houston, Texas

March 29, 2002
Exhibit 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Windswept Environmental
Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December
31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I , Michael O'Reilly, Chief Executive 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.


                                                        /s/ Michael O'Reilly
                                                     -------------------------
                                                     Michael O'Reilly
                                                     President and
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

                                                     Dated: February 14, 2003
#### COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Maurice WILLIAMS, Petitioner

No. 326 EAL 2017

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

January 3, 2018

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of January, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway, J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk July 26, 2010

s0719 

# Order

July 26, 2010

141269 & (11)

_____________ _______________ _____________

In re LABRECK.

_____________ _______________ _____________ PETER LABRECK, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141269 COA: 298196

OAKLAND CIRCUIT COURT, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the June 9, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we ar e not persuaded that the question presented
should be reviewed by this Court.