alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-Q/A
 AMENDMENT NO. 1
 QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For The Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2007
 Commission File Number 0-16759
 FIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
  INDIANA
    
    35-1546989(State or other jurisdiction
    
    (I.R.S. Employerincorporation or organization)
    
    Identification No.)One First Financial Plaza, Terre Haute, IN
    
    47807(Address of principal executive office)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (Registrants telephone number, including area code)
 þ o
 o þ o
 o þ




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE
REGARDING
THIS FORM 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1)
     2




---



##### 



Exhibit No:
    
    
    Description of Exhibit:31.1
    
    
    Sarbanes-Oxley Act 302 Certification for Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 by Principal Executive Officer, dated August 13, 200731.2
    
    
    Sarbanes-Oxley Act 302 Certification for Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 by Principal Financial Officer, dated August 13, 2007.32.1
    
    
    Certification, dated August 13, 2007, of Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2005
on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
  3




---



##### 



FIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
(Registrant)Date: August 13, 2007
    By
    /s/ Donald E. SmithDonald E. Smith, ChairmanDate: August 13, 2007
    By
    /s/ Norman L. LoweryNorman L. Lowery, Vice Chairman and CEODate: August 13, 2007
    By
    /s/ Michael A. CartyMichael A. Carty, Treasurer and CFO  4




---



##### 



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No:
    
    
    Description of Exhibit:31.1
    
    
    Sarbanes-Oxley Act 302 Certification for Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 by Principal Executive Officer, dated August 13, 200731.2
    
    
    Sarbanes-Oxley Act 302 Certification for Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 by Principal Financial Officer, dated August 13, 2007.32.1
    
    
    Certification, dated August 13, 2007, of Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2005
on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
  5
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2403 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2403

           To suspend temporarily the duty on Chloroacetone.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 17, 2005

   Mr. Gene Green of Texas introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on Chloroacetone.

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

SECTION 1. CHLOROACETONE.

    (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:

``      9902.09.10      1-Chloro-2-         Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         propanone (CAS                                                     31/2008
                         No. 78-95-5)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2914.70.90)......

    (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>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
PARTNERSHIP'S STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,334,932
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,334,932
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,945,841
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,502
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     150,339
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,945,841
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               120,400
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               234,186
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (182,186)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (182,186)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (182,186)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

# AGENCY:

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has issued an exposure draft of a proposed Interpretation of Federal Financial Accounting Standards titled                         *Debt Cancellation: An Interpretation of SFFAS 7, Paragraph 313.*

# DATES:

                        Respondents are encouraged to comment on any part of the exposure draft. Written comments are requested by July 23, 2021, and should be sent to                         *fasab@fasab.gov*                         or Monica R. Valentine, Executive Director, Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, 441 G Street NW, Suite 1155, Washington, DC 20548.                    

# ADDRESSES:

                        The exposure draft is available on the FASAB website at                         *https://www.fasab.gov/​documents-for-comment/​.*                         Copies can be obtained by contacting FASAB at (202) 512-7350.                    

      ( print page 33706)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Monica R. Valentine, Executive Director, 441 G Street NW, Suite 1155, Washington, DC 20548, or call (202) 512-7350.

Authority:31 U.S.C. 3511(d), the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), and the FASAB Rules of Procedure, as amended in October 2010.

Dated: June 21, 2021.

Monica R. Valentine,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 2021-13491 Filed 6-24-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:

*Name and Committee Code:*                     Virtual Site Review of construction progress of the CMS High Luminosity Detector Upgrade (1208).                

*Date and Time:*                     August 25, 2021; 10:30 a.m.—6:30 p.m. EDT.                

*Place:*                     Cornell University, 109 Clark Hall, Ithaca, New York 14853-250110027 | Virtual Site Visit via Zoom.                

*Type of Meeting:*                     Part-Open.                

*Contact Person:*                     Mark Coles, Program Director, Division of Physics, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue., Room 9219, Alexandria, VA 22314; Telephone: (703) 292-4432.                

*Purpose of Meeting:*                     Virtual site visit to provide an evaluation of the progress of the project at the host site for the Division of Physics at the National Science Foundation.                

*Agenda:*                     NSF will provide the Zoom coordinates for each meeting (All times are Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)).                

## August 25, 2021

10:30 a.m.-11:00 a.m. Executive Session (Closed)

11:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Presentations on the CMS upgrade (Open)

5:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m. Executive Session (Closed)

6:00 p.m.-6:30 p.m. Closeout presentation by Review Panel (Open)

*Reason for Closing:*                     The work being reviewed during closed portions of the virtual site visit include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal information concerning individuals associated with the project. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.                

Dated: June 24, 2021.

Crystal Robinson,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2021-13858 Filed 6-28-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### YOUKER v. YOUKER et al. In re LAURENT.

■(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

November 13, 1907.)

■Contempt—Grounds—Failure to Comply with Order op Court.

The fact that a referee in partition for a long time improperly withheld payment from a party of her distributive share of moneys in his hands payable to her under the judgment, while sufficient to render him subject to a proper application to the court to compel compliance on his part with the judgment, was no justification for holding him as for a contempt in failing to comply with an. order directing plaintiff in the action to proceed therewith and continue therein with all reasonable dispatch to judgment.

Appeal from Special Term, Fulton County.

Action by Alonzo Youker against Fremont Youker and others. /From an order denying his application to vacate an order adjudging "■him guilty of a contempt and imposing a fine, Fred C. Laurent, referee •in said action, appeals. Reversed.

Argued before SMITH, P. J., and CHESTER, KELLOGG, -COCHRANE, and SEWELL, JJ.

Clarence A. Leavitt, for appellant.

Charles A. Stone, for respondent.

CHESTER, J.

The appellant has been adjudged guilty of contempt of court in willfully disobeying the order of the court made •on the 22d day of December, 1906, by refusing and neglecting to •pay over to the defendant Fannie Barker her distributive share of the moneys in his' hands, being the proceeds of the sale of land in this action as directed in said order. Reference to the order of December 22, 1906, shows that it contains no such direction. That order commands the plaintiff, and not the appellant, to proceed with ■said action and to continue therein with all reasonable dispatch to -final judgment. There was no requirement in that order that the •appellant should do anything, and nothing áppears showing that he Fas in any respect violated it. The fact that he, as referee in partition, for a long time improperly withheld payment from the respondent of her distributive share of the moneys in his hands payable to her under the judgment, was sufficient to render him subject to a proper application to the court to compel compliance on his part with the judgment; but that fact is no justification for holding him as for a contempt in failing to comply with the order referred to, for he has not been shown guilty of any violation of that order.

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and_ the motion granted, without costs. All concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Sanchez, Appellant.

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Moskowitz, J.), rendered November 9, 1983, convicting him of murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

*762The hearing court did not err in determining that suppression of the self-incriminatory statements which defendant made to law enforcement authorities was not warranted *(see, People v Prochilo,*41 NY2d 759; *People v Armstead,*98 AD2d 726). Rather, under the totality of the circumstances *(People v Anderson,*42 NY2d 35; *People v Woods,*89 AD2d 1022), we conclude that defendant made the statements voluntarily after he knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional rights to counsel and to remain silent. Defendant’s mental condition did not prevent him from comprehending his *Miranda*rights, knowingly and intelligently waiving them, and making voluntary and reliable statements *(see, People v Schompert,*19 NY2d 300, *cert denied*389 US 874; *People v Love,*57 NY2d 998; *People v Williams,*62 NY2d 285; *People v Woods, supra; People v Kelly,*67 AD2d 1009; *see also, People v Crosby,*91 AD2d 20, *lv denied*59 NY2d 765). Moreover, since the authorities were completely unaware of defendant’s prior pending charge, on which an attorney had been assigned to represent him, they were not foreclosed from interrogating him on the instant matter *(see, People v Bartolomeo,*53 NY2d 225; *People v Servidlo,*54 NY2d 951; *People v Smith,*54 NY2d 954). Additionally, based on the record before us, it cannot be said that the authorities had any reason to inquire whether any charges were pending or that they avoided knowledge of legal representation through subterfuge or by deliberately overlooking the obvious, even though the prior, unrelated charge was pending in the same police department where the interrogation occurred and was less than two months old *(see, People v Fuschino,*59 NY2d 91; *People v Servidlo, supra; People v Beverly,*104 AD2d 996; *see also, People v Cunningham,*60 NY2d 930).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved or lacking in merit. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.
c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andd. Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the Company’s board of directors: (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: December 7, 2010 /s/ John Seton   John Seton   Chief Financial Officer
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Zackery Jamarcier Summage, Appellant

No. 06-14-00210-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 71st District Court of 

Harrison County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 14-

0058X). Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Morriss, Justice Moseley and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Zackery Jamarcier Summage, has adequately indicated his 

inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 3, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2132 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2132

   To extend the waiver authority of the Secretary of Education with 
respect to student financial assistance during a war or other military 
                    operation or national emergency.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2005

 Mr. Kline (for himself, Mr. Boehner, Mr. McKeon, Mr. George Miller of 
 California, and Mr. Kildee) introduced the following bill; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the waiver authority of the Secretary of Education with 
respect to student financial assistance during a war or other military 
                    operation or national emergency.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF WAIVER AUTHORITY.

    Section 6 of the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students 
Act of 2003 (20 U.S.C. 1070, note) is amended by striking ``September 
30, 2005'' and inserting ``September 30, 2007''.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerald Vincent POSEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-6169.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 1, 2011.

*140Jerald Vincent Posey, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen David Schiller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerald Vincent Posey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certifícate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Posey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
# C_2008140EN.01000701.xml

| 6.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5077 — Colony Capital/Morgan Stanley/Colfilm)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 140/06)

On 17 April 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5077. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5077. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---