alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Mexico  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Mexico  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------- | -------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 27,470 | 140,743 | 182,246 | 143,371
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 34,408 | 15,200 | 3,832  | 13,661 |        |        |        |         |         |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
EXHIBIT 99

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

     The undersigned  executive  officers of the Registrant  hereby certify that
this  Annual  Report  on Form 10-K for the year  ended  December  31,  2002 (the
"Report") 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 Report
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.


                                   By: /s/ Thomas A. Vann
                                       ------------------
                                       Name:  Thomas A. Vann
                                       Title: President and Chief
                                              Executive Officer


                                   By: /s/ William A. Wall
                                       ------------------
                                       Name:  William A. Wall
                                       Title: Executive Vice President, Chief
                                              Financial Officer and Secretary

Date: March 28, 2003
#### Com. v. Hardy

04/06/2016

878 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 134 A.3d 105
Exhibit 10.1


 



 FIVE STAR QUALITY CARE, INC.


 


First Amendment to the 2001 Stock Option and Stock Incentive Plan


 


This First Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the 2001 Stock Option and Stock Incentive Plan (the “Stock Plan”) of Five Star Quality Care, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Corporation”), hereby amends the Stock Plan as follows:


 


1.            The first sentence of Section 3 of the Stock Plan is hereby amended be deleting the first sentence of Section 3 and inserting in lieu thereof a new sentence to read as follows:


 


“The total number of shares of capital stock of the Company that may be subject to Options, Restricted Stock grants and Other Rights under the Plan shall be 3,000,000 shares of the Company's common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Common Stock”), from either authorized but unissued shares or treasury shares.”


 


2.            The third sentence of Section 13 of the Stock Plan is hereby amended be deleting the third sentence of Section 13 and inserting in lieu thereof a new sentence to read as follows:


 


“The Compensation Committee may grant Options, Restricted Stock or Other Rights under the Plan from time to time until the close of business on March 18, 2016.”


 


3.            This Amendment shall be as of March 18, 2006, subject to ratification by the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock present, or represented, and entitled to vote thereon at a duly held meeting of the stockholders of the Company within twelve months after such date. 


 


4.            Except as amended hereby, the Stock Plan shall remain in full force and effect.  In the event this Amendment is not ratified in accordance with Section 3 of this Amendment, the Stock Plan as in effect prior to this Amendment shall remain in effect.
#### In the Matter of Pascale Holloway, Respondent, v Rodney Johnson, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 869]

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Spinner, J.), entered December 19, 2002, as, upon directing his incarceration for contempt of court, imposed incarceration costs upon him of $197 per day.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the provision imposing incarceration costs is deleted.

The Family Court confirmed the finding of the Hearing Examiner that the father was in willful contempt of an order requiring him to pay child support and directed his incarceration for four months, unless he purged the contempt by paying the sum of $2,750. The Family Court also directed the father to pay $197 per day to the County of Suffolk for the costs of his incarceration.

Family Court Act § 454 sets forth the powers of the Family Court upon a finding that an order of support was violated. That provision does not permit the imposition of the costs of incarceration. As the Family Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and cannot exercise powers beyond those which are granted to it by statute *(see Matter of Pearson v Pearson,*69 NY2d 919, 921 [1987]), so much of the order as imposed incarceration costs upon the father must be reversed *(see Matter of Suffolk County Dept. of Social Servs. [Matthew] v Harry,*306 AD2d 490 [2003]; *Matter of Moron v Moron,*306 AD2d 349 [2003]; *Matter of DeMarco v Newton,*305 AD2d 501 [2003]). S. Miller, J.P., Friedmann, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor V. Cruz-Garcia, Appellant.

[53 NYS3d 364]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Rooney, J.), rendered July 29, 2015, convicting him of rape in the first degree, criminal sexual act in the first degree, and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Hawkins,*11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence *760
      *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant’s contentions that the People improperly questioned a police witness about evidence that had been suppressed prior to trial, and that the Supreme Court erred by allowing an emergency medical witness to testify as to the complainant’s prompt outcry, are unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, without merit *(see People v McDaniel,*81 NY2d 10, 16-17 [1993]; *People v Coico,*156 AD2d 578, 579-580 [1989]). Further, the defendant’s contentions that the court failed to sua sponte deliver an intoxication charge and erred in not allowing him to cross-examine a witness as to her alleged attempt to commit insurance fraud, are without merit *(see People v Smith,*27 NY3d 652, 659 [2016]; *People v Corby,*6 NY3d 231, 234-235 [2005]; *People v Cintron,*74 AD2d 457, 463 [1980]). Additionally, any error the court may have made by allowing the physician assistant who treated the complainant shortly after the incident to testify that the complainant was “fearful to talk” *(see People v McDaniel,*81 NY2d at 16-17; *People v Cridelle,*112 AD3d 1141, 1143 [2013]) was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt and no significant probability that the error contributed to his convictions *(see People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 242 [1975]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Delgado,*80 NY2d 780, 783 [1992]; *People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Rivera, J.P., Chambers, Duffy and Barros, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 13.1

                  Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350
                (Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection  with the filing by COLT Telecom Group plc (the  "Company") of the
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the  "Report"),
each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his or her 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/ Steven P. Akin                          /s/ Antony Bates
-------------------------------------       ------------------------------
Steven P. Akin                              Antony Bates
President and Chief Executive Officer       Chief Financial Officer

Dated: 30 April 2004
Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

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

I, Chris Bunka, President, CEO (Principal Executive Officer) and Director of Lexaria Corp. certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB (the "Report") for the year ended : October 31, 2008, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:

(i) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lexaria Corp.

Date: January 23, 2009

| |     |                                                                                                      
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                      
| | By: | /s/ "Chris Bunka"Chris Bunka
CEO (Principal Executive Officer) and Chairman of the Board of Directors



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Lexaria Corp. and will be retained by Lexaria Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.









---

Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

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

I, Chris Bunka, Principal Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) and Director of Lexaria Corp. certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB (the "Report") for the year ended : October 31, 2008, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:

(i) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lexaria Corp.

Date: January 23, 2009

| |     |                                                                                                                                
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                
| | By: | /s/ "Chris Bunka"Chris Bunka
Principal Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer), and Chairman of the Board of Directors



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Lexaria Corp. and will be retained by Lexaria Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             115
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,357
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        124
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,481
<PP&E>                                           4,212
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,567
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,763
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,713
<BONDS>                                          1,832
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              450
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            94
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,424
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,763
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,521
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,880
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   457
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 109
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    127
<INCOME-TAX>                                        43
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 84
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        84
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .90


</TABLE>
#### Hutchinson Burger, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Kathleen R. Bradshaw, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[50 NYS3d 267]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia Rodriguez, J.), entered December 10, 2015, which granted defendant Kathleen R. Bradshaw’s motion for reargument, and, upon reargument, denied plaintiffs’ motion for an extension of time to serve the summons, complaint, and amended complaint and for a default judgment against defendant, and dismissed all claims against defendant, without prejudice, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and defendant’s motion denied in all respects.

The proper vehicle for defendant to challenge the October 2012 order, which was granted on her default, was a motion to vacate a default order under CPLR 5015 (a) (1), and not a motion for renewal or reargument under CPLR 2221 (d) and (e) *(see Country Wide Home Loans, Inc. v Dunia,*138 AD3d 533, 533 [1st Dept 2016] [“The court properly denied plaintiff’s motion since the prior order was granted on default, and the proper remedy for plaintiff was to move to vacate the default pursuant to CPLR 5015, rather than by motion to renew”]; *300 W. 46th St. Corp. v Clinton Hous. W. 46th St. Partners, L.P.,*19 AD3d 136 [1st Dept 2005]; *Vasquez v Koret, Inc.,*151 AD2d 448*546[1st Dept 1989]; Siegel, NY Prac § 426). Accordingly, the motion court should have denied defendant’s motion to renew or reargue.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Webber and Gesmer, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
10-Q OF MOBILE AMERICA CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, 
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        32,816,532
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                       47,258,405
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                         47,214,142
<EQUITIES>                                   1,620,711
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                              93,864,353
<CASH>                                       3,423,513
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              33,521
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                      (2,213,877)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             141,639,459
<POLICY-LOSSES>                             35,445,628
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         35,419,908
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                             12,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       191,110
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,582,955
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               141,639,459
<PREMIUMS>                                  34,074,714
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                          4,423,154
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             170,159
<OTHER-INCOME>                               7,206,158
<BENEFITS>                                  25,154,597
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  2,103,151
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                        10,994,388
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              7,622,049
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,300,198
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,321,851
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,321,851
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .74
<RESERVE-OPEN>                              20,040,739
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                         29,000,994
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                           (4,129,504)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                          15,700,191
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                            12,921,000
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                             16,290,643
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                      4,129,504
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 102 (Thursday, May 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29192-29193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14068]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP94-43-019]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Refund Report

May 21, 1998.
    Take notice that on May 15, 1998, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing a report of refunds made to customers as a result 
of the settlement approved in Docket No. RP94-43-000. Article XI of the 
Stipulation & Agreement (S&A) provides that ANR will make refunds 
within 30 days, of the Effective Date. The Effective Date was March 16, 
1998, as a result of the Commission's order accepting and approving, in 
part, the settlement. ANR Pipeline Company, 82 FERC (CCH) para. 61,145 
(1998). On April 15, 1998, ANR complied with the S&A and the 
Commission's order.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on 
or before May 28, 1998. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to

[[Page 29193]]

be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-14068 Filed 5-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M