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


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         31,123
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               31,123
<PP&E>                                         518,965
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (111,181)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 620,138
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,298,841
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       28,034
<OTHER-SE>                                     (716,213)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   620,138
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               457,590
<CGS>                                          357,599
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,828,274
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4,727
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (1,733,010)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,733,010)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.07)



</TABLE>
# L_2013082DE.01006301.xml

| 22.3.2013 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 82/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2013

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 82/63

---

Berichtigung der Richtlinie 2004/81/EG des Rates vom 29. April 2004 über die Erteilung von Aufenthaltstiteln für Drittstaatsangehörige, die Opfer des Menschenhandels sind oder denen Beihilfe zur illegalen Einwanderung geleistet wurde und die mit den zuständigen Behörden kooperieren

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 261 vom 6. August 2004
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 261 vom 6. August 2004

Auf Seite 20, Artikel 2 Buchstaben b und c:

anstatt:

| „b) | ‚Beihilfe zur illegalen Einwanderung‘ die Fälle, die von Artikel 1 und 2 der Richtlinie 2002/90/EG erfasst sind; |
| --- | --- |

„b)

‚Beihilfe zur illegalen Einwanderung‘ die Fälle, die von Artikel 1 und 2 der Richtlinie 2002/90/EG erfasst sind;

| c) | ‚Menschenhandel‘ die Fälle, die von den Artikeln 1, 2 und 3 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/629/JI erfasst sind;“ |
| --- | --- |

c)

‚Menschenhandel‘ die Fälle, die von den Artikeln 1, 2 und 3 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/629/JI erfasst sind;“

muss es heißen:

| „b) | ‚Beihilfe zur illegalen Einwanderung‘ Fälle wie jene, die von Artikel 1 und 2 der Richtlinie 2002/90/EG erfasst sind; |
| --- | --- |

„b)

‚Beihilfe zur illegalen Einwanderung‘ Fälle wie jene, die von Artikel 1 und 2 der Richtlinie 2002/90/EG erfasst sind;

| c) | ‚Menschenhandel‘ Fälle wie jene, die von den Artikeln 1, 2 und 3 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/629/JI erfasst sind;“. |
| --- | --- |

c)

‚Menschenhandel‘ Fälle wie jene, die von den Artikeln 1, 2 und 3 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/629/JI erfasst sind;“.

---
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 1 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 2 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 3 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 4 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 5 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 6 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 7 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 8 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 9 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 10 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 11 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 12 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 13 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 14 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 15 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 16 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 17 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 18 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 19 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 20 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 21 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 22 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 23 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 24 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 25 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 26 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 27 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 28 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 29 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 30 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 31 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 32 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 33 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 34 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 35 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 36 of 37
Case 19-19690-RAM Doc 25 Filed 08/09/19 Page 37 of 37
Opinion issued December 22, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-16-00635-CV

———————————

IN RE TEXAS TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Texas Technical Services, Inc., has filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus challenging the denial of its motion to abate or stay the underlying 

proceeding based upon dominant jurisdiction.1 The petition is denied. We lift the 

stay of proceedings imposed by our August 12, 2016 order.

 

1 The underlying case is Parking Guidance Systems, LLC v. Texas Technical Services, 

Inc., cause number 2014-16785, pending in the 133rd District Court of Harris 

County, Texas, the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland presiding.
2

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Massengale, Brown, and Huddle.
**Exhibit 32.1**

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Energy Quest Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Wilf Ouellette, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the *Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002* that:

| 1)       

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the*Securities Exchange Act of 1934* , and

 

 

 

 

2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: September 30, 2010                                                                                                                     

 

*/s/ Wilf Ouellette*

 

Wilf Ouellette,

 

Director, President, Chief Executive Officer

                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10630

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID DEFINA, 

also known as Syde Patrick Defina,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:96-CR-49-1

- - - - - - - - - -

December 17, 1997

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Defina appeals from his sentence for possession with

intent to distribute approximately two kilograms of cocaine.

Defina pleaded guilty under his brother’s name in order to conceal

the fact that Defina was on probation at the time of his offense.

Defina’s true name was discovered prior to sentencing and he was

given a sentence enhancement for obstruction of justice.

Defina argues that the district court erred in failing to

reduce his offense level for acceptance of responsibility pursuant
No. 97-10630

-2-

to United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1. We review

the district court’s finding of acceptance of responsibility under

a standard even more deferential than the clearly-erroneous

standard. United States v. Ainsworth, 932 F.2d 358, 362 (5th Cir.

1991); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual [hereinafter U.S.S.G.] §

3E1.1 comment. (n.5).

Defina bore the burden of “demonstrating the recognition and

affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility.” United States

v. Ayala, 47 F.3d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1995); see U.S.S.G.

§ 3E1.1(a). Defina’s burden was much higher because a defendant

who has received a sentence enhancement for obstruction of justice

will not be granted a sentence reduction for acceptance of

responsibility, except under “extraordinary” circumstances.

U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a) comment. (n.4). Defina’s attempts to meet this

burden were clearly insufficient.

As Defina did not meet his burden of proof, it was proper for

the district court to summarily deny him the sentence reduction for

acceptance of responsibility.

AFFIRMED.
# L_2004224EN.01004901.xml

| 25.6.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 224/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 224/49

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1177/2004

of 24 June 2004

fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 582/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 23 June 2004. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 23 June 2004.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 582/2004, for the tendering period ending on 23 June 2004, the maximum amount of refund for the product and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be EUR 36,50/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 June 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 June 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004 (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 67.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58.

3

---
# L_2005093EN.01004501.xml

| 12.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 93/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 93/45

---

Corrigendum to Decision No 197 of 23 March 2004 on the transitional periods for the introduction of the European Health Insurance Card in accordance with Article 5 of Decision No 191

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 343 of 19 November 2004
  )

On page 30, in Annex III, with regard to Iceland:

for:

‘
  31 December 2005
  ’,

read:

‘
  30 April 2005
  ’.

---
# EUR-Lex - 32004R1209 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32004R1209

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1209/2004 of 30 June 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables **

*
Official Journal L 232 , 01/07/2004 P. 0009 - 0010 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1209/2004 of 30 June 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables(1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2) In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2004 .

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 June 2004 .

For the Commission

J. M. Silva Rodríguez

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17).

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 30 June 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

R EVISED O RDER

Appellate case name: Dawn M. Coulson v. Leslie Kiefer Amann, Dependent

Administrator with Will Annexed of the Estate of Robert C. Kiefer, Deceased

, and as President of Walden Technology, Inc.

Appel la te case number s : 01

- 1 7

- 00 720

- CV , 01

- 17

- 00721

- CV

Trial court case number: 424767

424767

- 401

Trial court: Probate Court No. 2 of Harris County

Appellant, Dawn M. Coulson, and appellee, Leslie Kiefer Amann, Dependent Administrator with Will Annexed of the Estate of Robert C. Kiefer, Deceased, and as President of Walden Technology, Inc.

, have filed a “ Joint Report Advising the Court of the

Status of the Settlement Negotiations and Request for Extension of Stay Pending Approval by Probate Court

, ” representing that the y “have finalized a settlement agreement ” that “is subject to the approval of Probate Court Number 2” and

, upon approval, the appeal s will

be dismissed

. T he parties request that the Court “extend the stay of the appeal proceedings until the probate court rules on the motion for approval of the settlement. ” We grant the

motion.

Accordingly, t he parties shall file no later than June 29 , 2018 , a motion to reinstate and dismiss the appeal s , a motion to reinstate and proceed with the appeal s , or a report advising the Court of the status of the settlement proceedings . If the parties do not respond as directed by June 29 , 2018, the case s will be reinstated on the Court’s active docket and the appeal s will proceed under the applicable Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The appeal s remains abated, treated as a closed case s , and removed from this

Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED.

Ju dge’s signature: /s/ Terry J e nnings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: M a y 22, 2018
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

In re: Chapter 11

Seven Stars on the Hudson Corp., Case No. 19-17544-SMG

 Debtor.

 /

Seven Stars on the Hudson Corp.,

Plaintiff,

v. Adv. No. 19-1230-SMG

MDG Powerline Holdings, LLC and

XBK Management, LLC, 

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

FINAL JUDGMENT

Scott M. Grossman, Judge

_____________________________________________________________________________ United States Bankruptcy Court

ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on January 31, 2022.

Case 19-01230-SMG Doc 241 Filed 01/31/22 Page 1 of 2
In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion1 and Order Granting Motions 

for Summary Judgment2 entered contemporaneously herewith, it is 

ORDERED that:

1. With respect to Counts I, II, III, and VI of the Second Amended 

Complaint,3 FINAL JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendant MDG Powerline 

Holdings, LLC and against Plaintiff Seven Stars on the Hudson Corp.

2. With respect to Counts IV, V, and VI of the Second Amended Complaint, 

FINAL JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendant XBK Management, LLC d/b/a 

Xtreme Action Park and against Plaintiff Seven Stars on the Hudson Corp.

###

Copies furnished to:

All interested parties by the Clerk of Court

1 ECF No. 234. 2 ECF No. 235. 3 ECF No. 138.

Case 19-01230-SMG Doc 241 Filed 01/31/22 Page 2 of 2
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Interpretation of D.C. resistivity, VLF, and total magnetic field intensity measurements of Kilauea Iki lava lake, 1979-1980      

      January 1, 1981    

View Document

No abstract available.

## Citation Information
Exhibit
10.17




Second Amendment to
Employment Agreement





This Second Amendment (“Second
Amendment”), to the Employment Agreement (the "Agreement") dated February 27,
2007 between Payment Data Systems, Inc. ("PDS") and Louis A. Hoch (“Executive")
is entered into this 12th day of April, 2010 and is made part of the Agreement which is
hereby amended as follows:





1.           Definitions.  All
capitalized terms used herein and not expressly defined herein shall have the
respective meanings given to such terms in the Agreement.





2.           Entire
Agreement.  Except as expressly modified by this Second
Amendment, the Agreement shall be and remain in full force and effect in
accordance with its terms and shall constitute the legal, valid, binding and
enforceable obligations of PDS and Executive.





3.           Successors and
Assigns.  This Second Amendment shall be binding upon and inure
to the benefit of the successors and permitted assigns of the parties
hereto.





4.           Section
References.  Section titles and references used in this Second
Amendment shall be without substantive meaning or content of any kind whatsoever
and are not a part of the agreements among the parties hereto evidenced
hereby.





5.           Now,
therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein and for
other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy, receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged:





a.
            The
      Base Salary as set forth in Schedule 4(a)(i) of Schedule 1 to the
      Agreement is hereby amended to be $24,000 per annum in year
      2010.




b.
            Schedule
      4(b) of Schedule 1 of the Agreement is replaced in its entirety with,
      “BONUS: Not to exceed 100% of the highest salary received in any year of
      the Agreement as described in Schedule 4(a)(i) of Schedule
    1.”





This
Second Amendment amends the Agreement as set forth herein. All previously
existing obligations under the Agreement are hereby reaffirmed in all
respects.





In
witness thereof, the parties
hereto have caused thisSecond Amendment to the Agreement to be executed on the day and
year first above written.





Payment
      Data Systems, Inc.
              
              ExecutiveBy:
              /s/ Michael R.
      Long
              
              By:
              /s/ Louis A.
      HochName: Michael R.
      Long
              
              Name: Louis A.
      HochTitle:CEO &
      CFO
Case 19-01298-MAM    Doc 472-34    Filed 10/22/20    Page 1 of 4

Case 19-01298-MAM    Doc 472-34    Filed 10/22/20    Page 2 of 4

Case 19-01298-MAM    Doc 472-34    Filed 10/22/20    Page 3 of 4

Case 19-01298-MAM    Doc 472-34    Filed 10/22/20    Page 4 of 4