alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[ARTICLE] 5
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   12-MOS
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          DEC-31-1997
[PERIOD-END]                               DEC-31-1997
[CASH]                                          13,541
[SECURITIES]                                         0
[RECEIVABLES]                                  850,526
[ALLOWANCES]                                  (30,000)
[INVENTORY]                                  4,171,027
[CURRENT-ASSETS]                             5,202,636
[PP&E]                                       8,801,092
[DEPRECIATION]                             (1,941,257)
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                              13,945,735
[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                        2,731,443
[BONDS]                                              0
[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                0
[PREFERRED]                                          0
[COMMON]                                     6,779,067
[OTHER-SE]                                           0
[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                13,945,735
[SALES]                                      5,714,132
[TOTAL-REVENUES]                             5,714,132
[CGS]                                        2,813,764
[TOTAL-COSTS]                                2,813,764
[OTHER-EXPENSES]                             2,434,867
[LOSS-PROVISION]                                     0
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                           (396,118)
[INCOME-PRETAX]                                120,150
[INCOME-TAX]                                    52,288
[INCOME-CONTINUING]                             67,862
[DISCONTINUED]                                       0
[EXTRAORDINARY]                                      0
[CHANGES]                                            0
[NET-INCOME]                                    67,862
[EPS-PRIMARY]                                      .02
[EPS-DILUTED]                                      .02
</TABLE>
No. 09-7952.

#### Billy John Galloway, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

559 U.S. 1050, 130 S. Ct. 2342,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2950.

176 L. Ed. 2d 564,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 344 Fed. Appx. 64.
II 

Calendar No. 650 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5132 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2006 

Received 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2006 

Read the first time 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special 

resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility 

of including in the National Park System certain sites 

in Monroe County, Michigan, relating to the Battles of 

the River Raisin during the War of 1812. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘River Raisin National 

5 Battlefield Study Act’’. 

mmaher on PROD1PC77 with BILLS

2 

HR 5132 PCS 

1 SEC. 2. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY, MONROE COUNTY, 

2 MICHIGAN, SITES RELATING TO BATTLES OF 

3 THE RIVER RAISIN. 

4 (a) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Secretary of the Inte5 rior shall conduct a special resource study of sites in Mon6 roe County, Michigan, relating to the Battles of the River 

7 Raisin on January 18 and 22, 1813, and their aftermath 

8 to determine— 

9 (1) the national significance of the sites; and 

10 (2) the suitability and feasibility of including 

11 the sites in the National Park System. 

12 (b) REQUIREMENTS.—The study conducted under 

13 subsection (a) shall include the analysis and recommenda14 tions of the Secretary on— 

15 (1) the effect on Monroe County, Michigan, of 

16 including the sites in the National Park System; and 

17 (2) whether the sites could be included in an 

18 existing unit of the National Park System. 

19 (c) CONSULTATION.—In conducting the study under 

20 subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with— 

21 (1) appropriate Federal agencies and State and 

22 local government entities; and 

23 (2) interested groups and organizations. 

24 (d) APPLICABLE LAW.—The study required under 

25 subsection (a) shall be conducted in accordance with Pub26 lic Law 91–383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–1 et seq.). 

mmaher on PROD1PC77 with BILLS

3 

HR 5132 PCS 

1 (e) REPORT.—Not later than three years after the 

2 date on which funds are first made available for the study, 

3 the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Resources 

4 of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

5 Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report con6 taining— 

7 (1) the findings of the study; and 

8 (2) any conclusions and recommendations of the 

9 Secretary. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 25, 

2006. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 

mmaher on PROD1PC77 with BILLS

Calendar No. 650 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5132 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

Raisin during the War of 1812. Michigan, relating to the Battles of the River Park System certain sites in Monroe County, ability and feasibility of including in the National a special resource study to determine the suitSEPTEMBER 28, 2006 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

mmaher on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-05-00151- CV Rus se ll J . V e r ne y, App e lla nt

v. Ca r oleK e e to n St r ay hor n, a s C om pt r oll e rof P ublicAc c ount s o f theSt at e of Te xa s; G r e g A bbot t, Indi vid ual ly a nd as At to r ne y G e ne r al o f theSt at e of Te xa s; and Reagan E . Gr eer , Ind ividu ally and as Executive Dir ect or of the Texas Lottery C om m ission , Appellees

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. GN404078 , HO NORAB LE STEPH EN YELENO SKY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E MO R

A N D UM O P I N I O N The pa rties have reque sted that we abate the a ppeal in this cause , 03-05-00151- CV, pending the resolution of the appea l in cause number 03-05-00064- CV, the pendingappea l from the g rant of two ple as to the jurisdiction, a s that case may control the disposition and render moot the appea l in the instant cause. Ac cording ly , we grant the moti on and aba te the appe al in cause number 03-05-00151- CV pending our re solution of cause numbe r 03-05- 00064-CV. The a ppeal in 03-05- 00151-CV will be re instated on the date that our opinion is handed down in ca use number 03- 05- 00064-CV.

W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces B . A. Smith and Pury ear Filed: May

12, 2005
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| March 23, 2011                   |   | By:    | /s/    | Ewout L. Steenbergen                        |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|       (Date) |   |   |   | Ewout L. Steenbergen              |
|                                       |   |   |   | Executive Vice President and |
|                                       |   |   |   | Chief Financial Officer           |

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. 

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel, Ottenbacher—Program Project.                     

*Date:*                         April 8, 2009.                     

*Time:*                         9 a.m. to 12 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).                     

*Contact Person:*                         Anne Krey, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health,  Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-6908.                     

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 6, 2009. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

 [FR Doc. E9-5423 Filed 3-12-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Army 

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with 37 CFR Part 404.6, announcement is made of the availability for licensing of U.S. Patent No. U.S. 7,494,946 entitled “Thermal Insulation for Articles of Clothing” issued February 24, 2009. This patent has been assigned to the United States Government as represented by the Secretary of the Army. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mr. Jeffrey DiTullio at U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center, Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, Phone; (508) 233-4184 or e-mail:                         *Jeffrey.Ditullio@natick.army.mil*.                     

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Any licenses granted shall comply with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR Part 404. 

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. E9-5460 Filed 3-12-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

SOPHIA BAKER

, 1

Respondent Below,

Appellant,

v.

JAMES VOSS

,

Petitioner Below,

Appellee. §

§

§ No. 174 , 20 21

§

§ Court Below: Family Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§

§ File No

. CN 20

- 01991

§ Petition No. 20

- 07695

§

§ In the interest of :

§ Karen Voss

- Baker

§

Submitted: August 24 , 20 21

Decided: September 15 , 20 21

O R D E R

(1) O n July 20 , 20 21 , the Senior Court Clerk sent a letter directing the

appellant to pay the Family Court filing fee and transcript cost on or before August

3, 2021 , or this Court would issue a notice to show cause why the appeal should not

be dismissed. On August 6, 2021

, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice

, sent by

certified mail, directing the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be

dismissed for the appellant’s failure to pay the Family Court filing fee and transcript

cost

.

1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d).2

(2) On August 13, 2021, the Cour t received the certified mail receipt

indicating that the notice to show cause had been delivered on August 11, 2021. A

timely response to the notice to show cause would have been due on or before August

23, 2021. The appellant having failed to respond t o the notice to show cause within

the required ten

- day period, dismissal of this action is deemed to be unopposed.

N OW, THEREFORE, IT IS OR DERED, under Supreme Court Rule s 3(b)

and 29(b) , that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr.

Justice
EXHIBIT
      31




CERTIFICATION





I,
      Hideyuki Shiraishi, certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Amanasu Technologies
      Corporation;





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of 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, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
      condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
      for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;





4.
      I am
      responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
      (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and we have:





a)
      Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
      during the period in which this report is being prepared;


b)
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
      by this report based on such evaluation; and


c)
      Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
      quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
      affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
      and





5.
      I have
      disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and
      the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing
      the equivalent function):








a)
      All
      significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
      report financial data; and


b)
      Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial
      reporting.








Date:
      August 13, 2006





/s/
      Hideyuki Shiraishi


Hideyuki
      Shiraishi


CEO,
      CFO,
      CAO
J-A01024-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

NICHOLAS O. BROWN IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellant

v.

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA AND SHERIFF OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

No. 3515 EDA 2014

Appeal from the Order November 3, 2014

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County

Civil Division at No(s): No. 120502028

BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., OTT, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*

JUDGMENT ORDER BY OTT: FILED JANUARY 19, 2016

The issue on appeal arises from the purchase of a parcel of property 

by Nicholas O. Brown at a sheriff’s sale, pursuant to the Municipal Claims 

and Tax Liens Act (MCTLA), 53 P.S. § 7101, et seq. Brown claims that he is 

entitled to rescission and restitution because the Sheriff delayed in deeding 

the property to him.

The question presented directly involves the interpretation, application 

and enforcement of the MCTLA. Exclusive jurisdiction of this appeal is 

vested in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. See 42 Pa.C.S. 

762(a)(4)(i)(A).

____________________________________________

*

Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A01024-16

- 2 -

We recognize that it is within the discretion of this Court to either 

decide this case on the merits or transfer it to the Commonwealth Court. 42 

Pa.C.S. §§ 704(a) and 705. Pa.R.A.P. 741(a) and 751(a). The trial court 

has opined that this appeal “should be in the Commonwealth Court,” and we 

are of the same view. Trial Court Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) Opinion, 5/12/2015, at 

1 n.1. Based on our review, we conclude it is appropriate to transfer this 

appeal to the Commonwealth Court because of the special expertise of the 

Commonwealth Court in addressing issues concerning the MCTLA. Transfer 

will also avoid a possible conflict of decisions between our Court and the 

Commonwealth Court. See generally, Trumbull Corp. v. Boss 

Construction, Inc., 747 A.2d 395 (Pa. Super. 2000).

Appeal transferred to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. 

Jurisdiction relinquished.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 1/19/2016
Amendment No.2 to Letter Agreement



 Exhibit 10.29 
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 
 TO LETTER AGREEMENT 

This Amendment No. 2 to Letter Agreement (the “Amendment”) is effective as of December 20, 2010, and amends that
certain letter agreement dated June 2, 2009, as amended (the “Agreement”), by and between iPass Inc., (“iPass”) and Foxhill Opportunity Master Fund, L.P. and its affiliates listed in the signature blocks in the Agreement
(collectively “Foxhill”). iPass and Foxhill together constitute the “Parties.” All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning attributed to them in the Agreement. 

Whereas, iPass was required to return $10 million of the Second Capital Reduction through a stock buyback program with any
remaining portion of the Second Capital Reduction to be returned to stockholders in the form of an extraordinary cash dividend to be declared by the Board and paid to stockholders by April 15, 2011; 

Whereas, iPass has repurchased $5.9 million of iPass common stock and returned $4.0 million to stockholders as an extraordinary
cash dividend paid on December 17, 2010; 
 Whereas, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to reduce the amount
of the Second Capital Reduction to $19.9 million; 
 Now, therefore, in accordance with procedures for amendment of the
Agreement set forth therein, and in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 
  

	 	1.	The amount of the Second Capital Reduction is amended to be $19.9 million. 


 

	 	2.	Foxhill agrees that iPass has met its obligation to return the Second Capital Reduction to stockholders. 


 

	 	3.	All other provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 


In witness whereof, the Parties herein have caused this Amendment to be duly executed as of the date written above. 

 

			
	IPASS INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/    EVAN L.
KAPLAN        

		 	Evan L. Kaplan
		 	Chief Executive Officer and President

  

			
	FOXHILL OPPORTUNITY MASTER FUND, L.P.
		
	By:	 	 Foxhill Opportunity Offshore Fund Ltd.
its general partner

		 
		
	By:	 	 Foxhill Capital Partners LLC
its investment manager

		 
		
	By:	 	 /s/    NEIL
WEINER        

	 
		 	Neil Weiner
		 	Managing Member
Kevin D. RECAR, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105730

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Filed: April 10, 2018

Gwenda R. Robinson, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, Saint Louis, MO. 63101, for appellant.

Robert J. Bartholomew, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO. 65102, for respondent.

Before Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., Angela T. Quigless, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

Kevin D. Recar ("Movant") appeals the motion court's denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. In his sole point on appeal, Movant contends the motion court erred in denying his post-conviction relief motion because there was an insufficient factual basis to support his guilty plea of trafficking methamphetamine in the second degree. We have reviewed the briefs *686of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the motion court did not clearly err. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to MO. R. CIV. P. 84.16(b) (2015).