alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIGURE 2. Percentage of children aged < 6 years participating in a grantee

immunization information system -- United States, six cities§, and eight Territories†, 2008

§ Chicago, IL (34%-66%);

District of Columbia (95%–100%);

Houston, TX (34%–66%); 

New York City, NY (95%–100%); 

Philadelphia, PA (95%–100%); 

San Antonio, TX (67%–94%).

† American Samoa (No Report);

Marshall Islands (67%-94%);

Federated States of Micronesia (95% -100%);

Guam (No Report);

N. Mariana Islands (No Report);

Palau (No Report);

Puerto Rico (67%-94%);

Virgin Islands (No Report).

No Report

In Transition*

0-33%

34-66%

67-94%

95-100%

National Coverage: 75% (excluding Territories)

Source: CY2008 IISAR

* In transition is defined as a grantee implementing a new 

IIS product.
EX-10.42



 Exhibit 10.42 

 
 



 
 December 21, 2011 
 The Delaware County Bank and Trust Company 
 110 Riverbend Avenue 

P.O. Box 1001 
 Lewis Center, Ohio
43035 
 Re: Request for Consent under Business Loan Agreement, dated as of March 24, 2004 (as amended and modified,
“Loan Agreement”), and any and all documents related thereto (“Loan Documents”) between Intellinetics, Inc. (“Intellinetics”) and The Delaware County Bank and Trust Company (“Lender”) 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 

The shareholders of Intellinetics desire to enter into a share exchange transaction with a public shell corporation named
Globalwise Investments, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“Globalwise”), whereby Intellinetics will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Globalwise and the existing shareholders of Intellinetics will own 86% of the capital stock of Globalwise
initially, although it is anticipated that Globalwise will sell up to an additional 26% of its capital stock in secondary stock offerings (collectively, the “Proposed Transactions”). Intellinetics will remain an Ohio corporation, will
remain the operating company and will remain bound by all obligations, liabilities, duties and rights under the Loan Agreement and the other Loan Documents. The current officers and board of directors of Intellinetics are set forth on Exhibit A
attached hereto. 
 By signing below, the Lender consents to the Proposed Transactions as described above and waives the effect
of any provisions of the Loan Agreement and other Loan Documents that the Proposed Transactions would otherwise conflict with or violate. This consent and waiver is limited only to the Proposed Transactions. Intellinetics expressly agrees that the
execution of this consent letter shall not, except as expressly set forth herein, constitute a waiver of and shall not preclude the exercise of any right, power or remedy granted to Lender in any of the Loan Documents, or as provided by law. No
previous modification, extension or compromise entered into with respect to any indebtedness of Intellinetics to Lender shall constitute a course of dealing or be inferred or construed as constituting an express or implied understanding to enter
into any future modification, extension or compromise. The Loan Agreement and the other Loan Documents remain in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed. 

 
  
  





 







  
 



 
  

			
	Sincerely,
	
	INTELLINETICS, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Matthew L. Chretien
		
	Title:	 	EVP/CTO


  

			
	THE DELAWARE COUNTY BANK AND TRUST
		
	By:	 	/s/ Michael Waddell
		
	Title:	 	AVP
		
	Date:	 	December 27, 2011

 Acknowledged and consented to: 
  

	
	Consigners:
	
	/s/ A. Michael Chretien
	A. Michael Chretien, Individually
	
	/s/ Matthew L. Chretien
	Matthew L. Chretien, Individually
	
	/s/ Robert J. D’Orazio
	Robert J. D’Orazio, Individually
```

[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 40529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20270]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y, (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec.  225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has 
determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible 
for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities 
will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than August 13, 1998.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (A. Linwood Gill III, Assistant 
Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:
    1. First Charter Corporation, Concord, North Carolina; to acquire 
HFNC Financial Corp., Charlotte, North Carolina, and thereby indirectly 
acquire Home Federal Savings and Loan Association, Charlotte, North 
Carolina, and thereby engage in operating a savings and loan 
association, pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(4)(ii) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 24, 1998.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 98-20270 Filed 07-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

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

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United
States Code), the undersigned officer of Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                      | 
|Dated: August 6, 2007 |  | /s/ L. Kevin Kelly     
|                      |  | L. Kevin Kelly         
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer
No. 11-6640.

#### Eugene Tyrone DeCastro, Petitioner v. Gerald Branker, Warden.

565 U.S. 1081, 132 S. Ct. 818,

181 L. Ed. 2d 529,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8701.

December 5, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 642 F.3d 442.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $6.81 CWT 0.965 $6.5717

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.5578 LB 3.5 $8.9523

Class I Price $15.5240

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.71 CWT 0.965 $7.4402

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.5393 LB 3.5 $8.8876

Class I Price $16.3277

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT ($0.8038)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.0691)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.0346)

Price change per quart ($0.0173)

Price change per pint ($0.0086)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.0062)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.0052)

Price change per half pint ($0.0043)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.07)

Price adjustment per half gallon ($0.03)

Price adjustment per quart ($0.02)

Price adjustment per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price adjustment per half pint ($0.00)

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: Nov. 4, 2018
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3246 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3246

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To require GAO review of certain TSA screening protocols, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Traveling Parents Screening 
Consistency Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW.

    Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a review of 
the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) implementation of 
the Bottles and Breastfeeding Equipment Screening Act (Public Law 114-
293), as well as the effectiveness of TSA in ensuring screening 
protocol clarity and screening consistency relating to the screening of 
formula, breast milk, purified deionized water for infants, and juice. 
Such review shall include the following:
            (1) Consider whether TSA effectively manages consistency of 
        screening protocol applications for formula, breastmilk, 
        purified deionized water for infants, and juice, including the 
        extent to which Transportation Security officers engage in 
        screening beyond that which is prescribed through relevant 
        policies and training.
            (2) Evaluate the need for TSA to update and revise 
        procedures for such screening.
            (3) Assess whether TSA effectively tracks passenger 
        complaints related to such screening to monitor trends and 
        identify inconsistencies.
            (4) Evaluate TSA's communications and information sharing 
        practices for passengers, air carriers, and airports relating 
        to screening protocols for such screening.
            (5) Evaluate TSA's policies regarding the screening of 
        passengers with nursing products, including the extent to which 
        such passengers are more likely to receive secondary screening.
            (6) Make recommendations for improving TSA's overall 
        screening practices relating to such screening.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 3246

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To require GAO review of certain TSA screening protocols, and for other 
                               purposes.
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 25, 2023

No. 04-22-00748-CR

IN RE David Gene BECKA

Original Proceeding1

ORDER

On November 4, 2022, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition 

complaining about a Bexar County residency requirement imposed as a bond condition in the trial 

court’s order titled “Special Conditions of Release on Bond.” Relator also filed an emergency 

motion for stay, which we granted in part on November 4, 2022. We requested responses from the 

trial court and real party in interest.

On December 13, 2022, the trial court filed a response revealing it signed an order on 

November 17, 2022, which allows relator to reside in Austin, Texas while out on bond—the relief 

he seeks through his petition. Accordingly, an order from this court will have no practical effect 

because there is nothing to mandamus. See In re Bonilla, 424 S.W.3d 528, 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2014) (orig. proceeding) (dismissing petition because relief sought had become moot). Because 

relator has received the relief requested in his petition, we DISMISS the petition as moot. The stay 

imposed on November 4, 2022 is LIFTED. 

It is so ORDERED on January 25, 2023.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 25th day of January, 2023.

_____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2019-CR-1257, styled The State of Texas vs. David Becka, pending in the 

144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Andrew Wyatt Carruthers presiding.
No. 10-10893.

#### Kenneth Lyle Spangle, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 855, 132 S. Ct. 186,

181 L. Ed. 2d 95,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5927.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 626 F.3d 488.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-2045]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Foreign Claims Settlement Commission
[F.C.S.C. Meeting Notice No. 3-98]


Sunshine Act Meeting

    The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its 
regulations (45 CFR Part 504) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 
U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of 
meetings and oral hearings for the transaction of Commission business 
and other matters specified, as follows:

Date and Time: Friday, February 20, 1998, 10:00 a.m.

Subject Matter: (1) Issuance of Proposed and Final Decisions on Claims 
Against Albania; (2) Hearings on the Record on Objections to Proposed 
Decisions on Claims Against Albania.

Status: Open.
    All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 
600 E Street, N.W., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or 
advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be 
directed to: Administrative Officer, Foreign Claims Settlement 
Commission, 600 E Street, NW., Room 6002, Washington, DC 20579. 
Telephone: (202) 616-6988.

    Dated at Washington, DC, January 21, 1998.
Judith H. Lock,
Administrative Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-2045 Filed 1-23-98; 12:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-U
Shade Definition terms

Terms used when Items Fail Shade.

Too Thin – The sample is lighter than the standard.

Too Full - The sample is darker than the standard. 

Too Red – The sample is redder than the standard.

Too Blue - The sample is bluer than the standard.

Too Green - The sample is greener than the standard.

Too Yellow - The sample is yellowier than the standard.

Too Orange – The sample is more orange than the standard.

Too Yellow /Green – The sample is more yellow and green than 

the standard.

Too Blue Green - The sample is more blue and green than the 

standard.

Too Violet – The sample is both too blue and too red to the 

standard.

Too Grey - The sample is duller and less color saturated than 

the standard.

Too Bright – The sample is brighter and more color saturated 

than the standard. 

Sample is Mottled – A blotchy or spotted appearance of the 

cloth.

Sample is slubbed – An Abruptly thickened place in the yarn.
Sample is shaded – Color is different from side to side or up 

and down or from the center of the cloth.

Sample is varied – sample has multiple hue variations and or 

light to dark, or saturation effects in a single lot.

Sample has barre′ - Sample has one or more picks in the cloth 

characterized by an apparent difference in the shade from the 

adjoining picks.

Sample is dirty – Sample has dirt on it.

Sample has warp streaks – Sample has a narrow warpwise 

band or overall warpwise striation characterized by apparent 

differences in color from adjoining ends.

Sample has uneven shade – Color is not uniform through the 

cloth.

Off –register printing – Pattern displacement caused by 

improperly placed printing rolls.

Mis-Print – Sample has the wrong pattern.

Stained- The sample has an area of discoloration in the cloth.

Sample is Haloed – Print registration darker around the print 

edge.

Sample has grin through – white or bright spots in a

laminated fabric.

Too sparkle(d) – bright spots in the finish.

Sample is Fuzzy – overall print is mottled and uneven.

Sample is metameric- sample matches standard when viewed 

under one light source but not another.
Terms used when items pass but are approaching a tolerance 

limit

X limit – example: Blue limit, sample is bluer than standard, 

but not as blue as service established tolerance. Finisher 

should evaluate sample to see if sample needs to be tweaked 

back to standard.

Extreme X limit- example: Extreme thin limit, sample is lighter 

than standard, and equivalent to, or slightly outside service 

established tolerance. Finisher should take immediate 

corrective action to tweak sample back to standard. If this is 

not done, on consecutive reports, it may ultimately be failed if 

no corrective action is taken.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                     3711188
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      143313
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                           2299000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                 0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>               20936974
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                    13988778
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                      13320249
<LOANS>                                  121074200
<ALLOWANCE>                                (866062)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           169818560
<DEPOSITS>                               140069615
<SHORT-TERM>                               4980000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         553938
<LONG-TERM>                                9660601
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   1356670
<OTHER-SE>                                13197735
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           169818560
<INTEREST-LOAN>                            2481052
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           618394
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           3099446
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                         1628754
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         1832938
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                      1266508
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                56938
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             847245
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             486192
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  486192
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                328086
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .25
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                3.21
<LOANS-NON>                                  67906
<LOANS-PAST>                               131,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            810303
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                 1179
<RECOVERIES>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           866062
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        866062
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                              0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          0


</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

March 28, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver 132751 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 132751 COA: 261233 Kent CC: 04-005331-FH KEVIN JOHN RIDEOUT, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 26, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERS E, in part, the deci sion of the Court of Appeals. We do not disturb the Court of Appeals ruling that a new trial is warranted because the jury was no t adequately instructed on the issues of pr oximate and intervening cause. But the Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that the defendant's wrongful conduct could not be the prox imate cause of the decedent's death. A reasonable jury

could find that the actions of the decede nt were foreseeable based on an objective

standard of reasonableness. People v Schaefer , 473 Mich 418, 437-438 (2005), overruled in part by, explained by, People v Derror , 475 Mich 316 (2006). Accordingly, the prosecutor may retry the defendant on the ch arge of operating wh ile intoxicated or operating while visibly im paired causing death.

We REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals to address the defendant's remaining issue concerning th e admissibility of expert testimony, which may arise again if defendant is retried on the same charge.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

d0321 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.

March 28, 2007

Clerk
EXHIBIT 10.34

 

PROMISSORY NOTE

 

	
Amount:  $100,000
    	
 
    	
Date:  March 20, 2012
    


 

For value received, the undersigned, GeoPetro Resources Company (“Payor”), hereby promises to pay on demand to Stuart J. Doshi (“Holder”) the principal sum of One Hundred Thousand ($100,000.00) with interest from March 20, 2012 at a rate of ten percent (10%) per annum, payable quarterly, or upon repayment of the loan in the event that the loan is repaid earlier. Additionally, the Company will issue 20,000 warrants to purchase 20,000 shares of GeoPetro Resources Company’s common stock to the Holder or his designee(s) at an exercise price of $0.50 per share, good for three (3) years.

 

 

	
Signed   by:
    	
 
    
	
GeoPetro Resources Company
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   David V. Creel
    	
 
    
	
David   V. Creel
    	
 
    
	
Vice   President  
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   Dale W. Dvoracek
    	
 
    
	
Dale   W. Dvoracek
    	
 
    
	
Controller