alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION BY PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
                                    OFFICER

In connection with the Annual Report of Elbit Medical Imaging Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Shimon
Yitzhaki, 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, 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 as amended; 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: June 30, 2006


/s/ Shimon Yitzhaki
-------------------------------------
Shimon Yitzhaki
President & Chief Financial Officer
No. 09-10984.

#### Timothy Evans, Petitioner v. Illinois.

562 U.S. 858, 131 S. Ct. 129,

178 L. Ed. 2d 77,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6116.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.

Same case below, 389 Ill. App. 3d 1145, 364 Ill. Dec. 645, 976 N.E.2d 1208.
Order entered October 19, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 15

- 00521

- CV

ALFRED HENDRICKS SR. , Appellant

V.

DALLAS COUNTY, ET AL ., Appellee s

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. TX

- 13

- 30828



### O RDER

We GRANT Appellant’s October 15, 201 5 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to

File an Amended/Corrected Motion to Dismiss and ORDER Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss be

filed no later than November 16, 2015

.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
#### Harry S., Matter of, v Olivia S.A.

1st Dept: 143 AD3d 531

denied
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 18

- 00201

- CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 141st District Court Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 141

- 2 67462

- 13

Before Pittman, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### S OLOY



### , L.L.C.

, Appellant

V



### .

E AGLE 

### M ED



### , L.L.C. , Appellee2 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered the parties’ “Agreed Motion to Dismiss Appeal Against

Eagle M ed, L.L.C..” We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. Se e Tex. R. App. P.

42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Appellant must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: February 28, 2019
EXHIBIT 13.1




Section 906 Certification by Principal Executive Officer
  In connection with the Annual Report of Elbit Imaging Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dudi Machluf co-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, 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 as amended; 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 9, 2010
  By: /s/ Dudi Machluf

Name: Dudi Machluf

Title:   co-Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 21.1**The following is a list of all of the Company’s significant subsidiaries, their jurisdictionof incorporation and the names under which they do business, if different from their name.     **Company** **Jurisdiction** **Any other name under which they do**    **business**JingTai Industrial Investment Co. Ltd. Hong Kong N/A     BHL Networks Technology Co Ltd(“BHLHK”) Hong Kong N/A     Jingle Technology Co Ltd (“Jingle”) BVI N/A     BHL Networks Technology Co Ltd(“BHL Net”) Cayman Islands N/A     Beijing BHL Networks Technology Co Ltd(“BBHL”) China N/A     China Natures Technology Inc. (“CNT”) BVI N/A     Zhejiang University (Hangzhou) InnoessenBio-technology Inc. (“Zhejiang Innoessen”) China N/A     ChinaGreen Industry Group Limited (“Green Industry”) BVI N/A     Green Energy Industry Limited (“Green Energy”) BVI N/A     Fullwing Limited (“Fullwing”) BVI N/A     Margot Limited (“Margot”) BVI N/A     China Green Holdings Limited (“GreenHoldings”) BVI N/A     Sinofield Group Limited (“Sinofield”) BVI N/A     Southwick International Limited(“Southwick”) BVI N/A     Trenda International Limited (“Trenda”) BVI N/A     Shenzhen Innoessen Bio-Tech Inc. (“ShenzhenInnoessen”) China N/A     China Merchants Zhangzhou DevelopmentZone Innoessen Biotech Co., Ltd (“ZhangzhouInnoessen”) China N/A     China Green Investment Group Limited(“Green Investment”) China N/A     China Green Food Investment Limited (“Green Food Investment”) BVI N/A     Wellknown Limited (“Wellknown”) BVI N/A     Green China Club Limited (“Green Club”) BVI N/A
Th e Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, Chief Judge, United States District Cour t 1 for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Raymond L. Erickson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.



## United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-3379

___________ John Fiola, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the Unite d States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Social Security Commissioner, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 22, 1997 Filed: September 9, 1997

___________ Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. John Fiola appeals the district court's orde r 1 granting summary judgment affirming the Commissioner' s decision t o deny Fiola disability insurance benefits and supplement al security income. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' submissions, we affirm th e ju dgment of the district court on the basis of th e reasons se t forth in the magistrate judge's report. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT .
Exhibit        10.5

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements        of Elbit Systems Ltd. on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-9354 and 333-139512) of our report dated        January 15, 2008, with respect to the financial statements of Microwave Networks Solutions,        Inc., which report appears in this December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 20-F of Elbit        Systems Ltd.

 

 

| By: | /s/ Hoberman, Miller, Goldstein & Lesser,                        CPA’s, P.C. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Hoberman, Miller, Goldstein & Lesser, CPA’s, P.C.

 

 

May 27,        2008
2017-1771.

#### In re Adoption of R.M.T.

Warren App. Nos. CA2016-12-107, CA2017-05-056, and CA2017-05-057, 2017-Ohio-8639. Motion for immediate stay denied as moot.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28526-28527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-13901]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-219]


GPU Nuclear, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for 
Amendment to Facility Operating License

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
the request of GPU Nuclear Inc. (the licensee) to withdraw its July 16, 
1997, application for proposed amendment to Facility Operating License 
No. DPR-16 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, located in 
Ocean County, New Jersey.
    The proposed amendment would have revised the Oyster Creek Security 
Training and Qualification Plan. .
    The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment published in

[[Page 28527]]

the Federal Register on December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66138). However, by 
letter dated May 14, 1998, the licensee withdrew the proposed change.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated July 16, 1997, and the licensee's 
letter dated May 14, 1998, which withdrew the application for license 
amendment. The above documents are available for public inspection at 
the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L 
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room 
located at the Ocean County Library, Reference Department, 101 
Washington Street, Toms River, New Jersey 08753.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of May 1998.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ronald B. Eaton Sr.,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-13901 Filed 5-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
exv10w2



 





Exhibit 10.2




May 18, 2006




Mr. Kent McRee

4424 Staten Island Drive

Plano, Texas 75024




Dear Kent,




The following outlines the commission and bonus plan for calendar year 2006.



Claimsnet.com’s sales today are approximately $110,000 per month, with associated cost of sales at
$20,000. This equals gross profit of $90,000. The immediate goal is to double that to gross sales
of $220,000 a month, with associated cost of sales at $40,000 a month for a gross profit of
$180,000 per month. The gross profit of $180,000 per month is the goal to achieve regardless of
the gross profit percentage.



At the time we reach an average gross profit over the trailing 3 months of $180,000 a bonus will be
payable of 6.25% of the aggregate increase of gross profit, provided that goal has been reached in
12 months from start date. A commission of 6.25% on all gross profit over the base amount of
$90,000 will be paid following the attainment of the immediate goal.



It is anticipated, and has been discussed, that this plan will need revision over time, by either
raising the base amount, a change in the commission structure, or a profit sharing plan for senior
management. However, under normal circumstances this would not occur until a monthly gross profit
of $300,000 has been achieved.



You will be responsible for direct sales of SWAT and development with our management team of new
business plans for mergers, acquisitions, product development or strategic alliance partnerships.



In addition, approved cell phone expenses will be reimbursed, and access to a lap top computer will
be provided as needed. Approved travel and related expenses will be reimbursed. A covered parking
space will be provided under our building.



Sincerely,




Don Crosbie

CEO
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Franco, Appellant.

[63 NYS3d 858]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J. at suppression hearing; Bonnie G. Wittner, J. at plea and sentencing), rendered November 2, 2015, convicting defendant of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal, which forecloses his suppression and excessive sentence claims. Although the oral colloquy was brief, it separated the right to appeal from the rights automatically given up by pleading guilty, and, when taken together with a comprehensive written *485waiver, the colloquy satisfied the requirements for a valid waiver (see *People v Bryant,*28 NY3d 1094 [2016]).

Regardless of whether defendant made a valid waiver, we find that the hearing court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion, and that defendant’s arguments concerning the conduct of the hearing and the court’s discretionary decision to grant the People’s reargument motion do not warrant reversal. We also perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Andrias, Kern and Oing, JJ.
164 A.3d 392

#### SAMIRAH MCDANIEL AND DOLORES GILMORE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ADVANCED PAIN MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS, P.C., AND AMGAD HESSEIN, DEFENDANTS, AND ASHRAF SAMI, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

March 16, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 190

To repeal the mandatory 20 percent income tax withholding on eligible rollover

distributions which are not rolled over.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

A BILL

To repeal the mandatory 20 percent income tax withholding

on eligible rollover distributions which are not rolled over.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF MANDATORY 20 PERCENT INCOME

4 TAX WITHHOLDING ON ELIGIBLE IRA ROLL5 OVER DISTRIBUTIONS WHICH ARE NOT

6 ROLLED OVER.

7 (a) REPEAL OF WITHHOLDING REQUIREMENT.—

8 Subsection (b) of section 522 of the Unemployment Com9 pensation Amendments of 1992 (relating to withholding

10 on eligible rollover distributions which are not rolled over),

11 and the amendments made by such subsection, are hereby
2

•S 190 IS

1 repealed, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be

2 applied and administered as if such subsection, and

3 amendments, had never been enacted.

4 (b) OFFSET.—The President is authorized to reduce

5 obligations and expenditures for programs, projects, and

6 activities authorized under the Foreign Assistance Act of

7 1961, except for allocation of funds for countries specified

8 in law, by such sums as are necessary to offset the loss

9 of revenues under subsection (a).

Æ
160 A.3d 708

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ROBERT T. BROWN, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 13, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
EXHIBIT 12

                     MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST I
                     MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING I, L.P.
                      COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
          COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               For the Year Ended                      For the Year Ended          
                                                                December 25, 1998                       December 26, 1997          
                                                         ----------------------------------      ----------------------------------
                                                         Merrill Lynch      Merrill Lynch        Merrill Lynch      Merrill Lynch  
                                                           Preferred          Preferred             Preferred         Preferred    
                                                         Capital Trust I    Funding I, L.P.      Capital Trust I    Funding I, L.P.
                                                         ---------------    ---------------      ---------------    ---------------
<S>                                                         <C>              <C>                   <C>                <C>        
Earnings                                                    $21,971,652      $25,781,746           $22,094,110        $25,914,731
                                                            ===========      ===========           ===========        ===========

Fixed charges                                               $        --      $        --           $        --        $        --
                                                                                                 
Preferred securities distribution                                                                
  requirements                                               21,312,500       21,971,652            21,312,500         21,971,652
                                                            -----------      -----------           -----------        -----------
                                                                                                 
Total combined fixed charges and                                                                 
  preferred securities distributions                        $21,312,500      $21,971,652           $21,312,500        $21,971,652
                                                            ===========      ===========           ===========        ===========
                                                                                              
Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                                         1.03             1.17                  1.04               1.18
</TABLE>
**Exhibit 11 – Computation of Earnings Per Share**                       **Fiscal Year Ended December 31,**  **2003** **2002** **2001** **2000** **1999**BASIC & DILUTED                    Net income (loss) $1,261,000  $1,252,000  $110,000  $504,000  $475,000 Basic average shares outstanding  1,489,114   1,488,764   1,488,764   1,488,764   1,309,966 Diluted average shares outstanding  1,539,153   1,511,139   1,494,328   1,488,764   1,309,966 Net income (loss) per share:                    Basic $0.85  $0.84  $0.07  $0.34  $0.36 Diluted $0.82  $0.83  $0.07  $0.34  $0.36 
54
Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers



 Exhibit 10.14 
 Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers 
 As of May 12, 2006, the following are the current base
salaries of the following named executive officers (as defined in Item 402(a)(3) of Regulation S-K) of Cadmus Communications Corporation: 
  

					
	 Bruce V. Thomas
	  	$	472,500	 
	 President and Chief Executive Officer
	  			
	 Wayne B. Luck
	  	$	214,302	 
	 Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer
	  			
	 Gerard P. Lux, Jr.
	  	$	300,000	 
	 President, Cadmus Specialty Packaging
	  			
	 Paul K. Suijk
	  	$	275,000	*
	 Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	  			



	*	effective May 15, 2006 

 Typically, changes in base salaries of the
named executive officers are determined each October. 
 Note: Compensation of Stephen E. Hare, the former Executive Vice President and President,
Publisher Services Group, is now governed by the Change in Status Agreement, entered into on April 8, 2006, and filed as Exhibit 10.53 to this report on Form 10-Q.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7226
DAVID WATTLETON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER; ARTHUR F. BEELER; STEPHEN WILLIAMS; ANGELA WALDEN WEAVER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-772-5-F) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 4, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Wattleton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: David Wattleton appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reinstate his civil complaint. Our review of the record discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wattleton v. Sawyer , No. CA-02-772-5-F (E.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### State v. Soraich

DA 16-0345

04/26/17

2017 MT 98N

Affirmed

Dist. 13 (Yellowstone)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MOBILE AMERICA CORPORATION FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        17,022,749
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                     692,730
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                              28,804,181
<CASH>                                       5,421,267
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                          13,618,481
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                        (427,225)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              79,397,937
<POLICY-LOSSES>                             22,011,655
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         15,410,899
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        2,947,547
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                              6,727,610
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       198,610
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,813,805
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                79,397,937
<PREMIUMS>                                   5,653,720
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            472,994
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                            (403,897)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 812,178
<BENEFITS>                                   3,704,851
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  1,408,927
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                         3,714,761
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,293,544)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (893,167)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,400,377)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.19)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                              12,299,879
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                          4,055,119
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                             (393,043)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             669,847
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                             4,805,129
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                             10,486,979
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                       (393,043)


</TABLE>