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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET ON THE FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997
AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS FILED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,411
<SECURITIES>                                    29,555
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,705
<ALLOWANCES>                                       423
<INVENTORY>                                      1,171
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,051
<PP&E>                                           9,997
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,121
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  48,015
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,636
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,297
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    48,015
<SALES>                                         34,732
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,732
<CGS>                                           13,479
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,479
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,985
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,343
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    132
<INCOME-TAX>                                        36
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 96
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        96
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     $.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     $.01
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Saul Vega, Respondent, v Harold J. Smith, as Superintendent of Attica Correctional Facility, et al., Appellants.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed *(see, People ex rel. Corcoran v Smith,*105 AD2d 1142). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J. — art 78.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and O’Donnell, JJ.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10
- 19
- 00261
- CR DAVID GONZALEZ
- ESTRADA , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2018
- 1530
- C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

David Gonzalez

- Estrada was convicted of online solicitation of a minor. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 33.021 (West 2016). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Gonzalez

- Estrada’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error andG onzalez

- Estrada v. State Page 2

compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the du ties required of appointed counsel. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; High v.
State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); s ee also Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313,
319

- 320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)

. In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, “after a full examination of all the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); accord Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 509

- 11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is “wholly frivolous” or “without merit” when it “lacks any
basis in law or fact.” McCoy v. Court of Appeals , 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly
frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

- 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly,
we affi rm the trial court's judgment. Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Gonzalez

- Estrad a is granted.

JOHN E. NEILL JusticeG onzalez

- Estrada v. State Page 3

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed February 26, 2020 Do not publish [CR25]
EXHIBIT 12.2
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 I, S. Jane Bell, certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this transition report on Form 20-F of Olympus Pacific Minerals Inc.;
 
 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state 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, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;
 
 4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)for the Company and have:
 
 a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theCompany, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;
 
 b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
  
 
 c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our 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
 
 d. Disclosed in this report any change in the Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the transition report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of the Company’s board of directors:
 
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
 Date: September 28, 2012
 /s/S. Jane Bell
 Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND TRUST CORPUS AS OF SEP-30-1995 AND THE
STATEMENT OF DISTRIBUTABLE INCOME FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPT-30-1995 AND
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       2,808,741
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,686
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,832,427
<PP&E>                                     380,905,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             379,878,806
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,858,621
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,832,427
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,026,194
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,858,621
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,019,100
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               322,042
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,767,571
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,767,571
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .039
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .039
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 The Honorable Lloyd D. George, United States District Judge for the **

District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision ***

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DEVONTE BERNARD HARRIS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

KEITH HIGGINS; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 12-15721

D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01711-LDG

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lloyd D. George, District Judge, Presiding** 

Submitted July 24, 2013*** 

Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

On February 2, 2013, the district court certified that this appeal is not taken

in good faith and has revoked appellant’s in forma pauperis status. Our review of

FILED

AUG 02 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-15721

the record indicates that appellant is entitled to in forma pauperis status for this

appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

California state prisoner Devonte Bernard Harris appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging

retaliation and violations of his Eighth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the dismissal of an

action for failure to comply with an order to file an amended complaint. Ferdik v.

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We vacate and remand.

The district court did not make explicit findings concerning the five factors

relevant to dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Id. at 1260-61

(describing relevant factors). We may, however, “review the record independently

to determine if the district court has abused its discretion.” Id. at 1261.

Our review shows that the “extreme circumstances” justifying dismissal with

prejudice under Rule 41 may not have been present. Id. at 1260 (dismissal with

prejudice under Rule 41(b) “is a harsh penalty and . . . should only be imposed in

extreme circumstances”); see also Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 643 (9th

Cir. 2002) (granting leave to amend and warning of dismissal for failure to comply

did not constitute consideration of less drastic alternatives). For example, the order

dismissing Harris’s action states that Harris did not provide any reason in his
3 12-15721

motion for extension of time for his failure to timely file that motion. His motion,

however, did provide a reason.

Accordingly, because it is not clear from the record whether dismissal was

appropriate, we vacate and remand for further consideration, including whether,

under the relevant factors, dismissal with prejudice is warranted. 

Harris’s pending motions are denied as unnecessary.

VACATED and REMANDED.
|2004 Expenditures and Budget (Support Allocated)
|------------------------------------------------
|Program                                         
|Insurance                                       
|Supervision & Consumer Protection               
|Receivership Management                         
|General & Administrative
#### FRIEZE, Respondent, v. ALABAMA GREAT SOUTHERN R. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

April 12, 1912.)

Action by Lyman B. Frieze, Jr., against the Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1909 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1909

             To suspend temporarily the duty on Flutolanil.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2005

Mr. Etheridge introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To suspend temporarily the duty on Flutolanil.

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

SECTION 1. FLUTOLANIL.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following:

``      9902.04.43       N-3[3-(1-          Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Methylethoxy)phen                                                  31/2008
                         yl]-2-
                         (trifluoromethyl)
                         benzamide
                         (Flutolanil) (CAS
                         No. 66332-96-5)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2924.29.47)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.13    
    


 
 

THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE
  WADDELL & REED FINANCIAL, INC.
  1998 EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION STOCK OPTION PLAN    
    


        Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), previously established the Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. 1998
Executive Deferred Compensation Stock Option Plan (the "Plan"). Pursuant to Section 8.1 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company reserves the right to amend the Plan. Pursuant to the
powers reserved in the Plan, the Plan is amended effective January 1, 2004. 


        1.     Section 3.2
of the Plan is hereby restated in its entirety to read as follows: 




        Section 3.2.    Authority of Committee.    The Committee shall have full power and authority to:
(i) interpret and construe the Plan and adopt such rules and regulations as it shall deem necessary and advisable to implement and administer the Plan, and (ii) designate persons other
than members of the Committee or the Board to carry out its responsibilities, subject to such limitations, restrictions and conditions as it may prescribe, such determinations to be made in accordance
with the Committee's best business judgment as to the best interests of the Company and its stockholders and in accordance with the purposes of the Plan. Except to the extent the Committee provides
otherwise, Awards and/or income associated with or resulting from Awards may be deferred either automatically or at the election of a Participant pursuant to and to the extent provided under a
separate deferred compensation plan adopted by the Company, which plan may provide for and determine the amount (if any) of deemed earnings on any deferred amount during any deferral period. The
Committee may delegate administrative duties under the Plan to one or more agents as it shall deem necessary or advisable. 





        2.     Except
as hereby amended, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 









QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.13


THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE WADDELL & REED FINANCIAL, INC. 1998 EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION STOCK OPTION PLAN
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1882 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1882

            To suspend temporarily the duty on Alkylketone.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2005

 Mr. Cleaver introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on Alkylketone.

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

SECTION 1. ALKYLKETONE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.76      1-(4-chlorophenyl)- Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         4, 4-dimethyl-3-                                                   31/2008
                         pentanone (CAS
                         No. 66346-01-8)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2914.70.40)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

TROY MOATS, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF 

CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE 

ADRIANA ESCOBAR, DISTRICT 

JUDGE, 

Respondents, 

and 

TROY BURGESS, 

Real Party in Interest. 

No. 81912 

FILED 

JAN 2 7 2022 

ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERT1PREME COURT 

BY DEPUTY CLERX 

ORDER DENYING PETITION 

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging 

a district court order sustaining an objection to the discovery 

commissioner's recommendation that the examination of real party in 

interest's mental condition proceed under NRS 52.380. 

Petitioner Troy Moats argues that the district court manifestly 

abused its discretion by sustaining real party in interest Troy Burgess's 

objection to the discovery commissioner's report and recommendation 

concluding that NRS 52.380 supersedes NRCP 35. 

The decision to entertain a writ petition is discretionary. Davis 

v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 129 Nev. 116, 118, 294 P.3d 415, 417 (2013). 

We recently held that NRS 52.380 violates the separation of powers 

et7 - C.9.2 (act 7 

" .•. 
doctrine. See Lyft, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 137 Nev., Adv. Op. 

86, P.3d _, (2021). Because the district court concluded that NRCP 

35 supersedes NRS 52.380, which was consistent with our holding in Lyft, 

we decline to entertain Moats's petition. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the petition DENIED. 

Q-101".00641737 

Parraguirre 

, 

, J. Al4L-0 

Hardesty Stiglich 

f LILIIAL4 J 

Cadish Silver 

Pieku J. 

Pickering Herndon 

cc: Hon. Adriana Escobar, District Judge 

Hon. Linda M. Bell, Chief Judge 

H&P Law, PLLC 

Winner Booze & Zarcone 

Lincoln, Gustafson & Cercos 

Claggett & Sykes Law Firm 

The Powell Law Firm 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

2 

. . 

• 

le •ssat ..M.144%,