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

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         685,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         122,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             7,000,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 36,876,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      30,860,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        29,143,000
<LOANS>                                     85,250,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                    908,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             175,207,000
<DEPOSITS>                                 150,356,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                 2,501,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,393,000
<LONG-TERM>                                 11,725,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,047,000
<COMMON>                                     1,220,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,965,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             175,207,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              3,552,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,207,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               353,000
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             6,112,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,732,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,220,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,892,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  349,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             (5,000)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,861,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                417,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   326,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.82
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.58
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,059,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   292,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,975,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                1,473,000
<RECOVERIES>                                    57,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              908,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           908,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          8,000


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32   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 Annual Report of Zaldiva, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K for the year ending September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), we, Nicole Leigh, President, and Robert B. Lees, CFO of the Registrant, 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 Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.  Date:December 28, 2009By:/s/Nicole LeighNicole Leigh, President and Director  Date:December 28, 2009By:/s/Robert B. LeesRobert B. Lees, CFO and Director
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.7

     

    
      


       

      WECOSIGN TM

      
        
          	 
	
                  RENTAL
      PAYMENT GUARANTEE CERTIFICATE

                


        

      

       

      Certificate Number:
1234

       

      Sample

      Sample

      Sample

      Sample

      


      Tenant :
Joe Tenant

      


      Guarantor
:

      


      WECOSIGNTM Inc., a California
Corporation

      3400 West
MacArthur Blvd., Suite I

      Santa
Ana, California 92704

      P
714-556-6800

      F
714-556-6803

      info@wecosign.com

      www.wecosign.com

       

      Agreement:

      


       

      The
Parties to this Agreement
are WECOSIGNTM, Inc. a California
corporation (hereinafter referred to as “CO-SIGNER”), and Network Management Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as “OWNER/AGENT”).

       

      The OWNER
AGENT acknowledges that they have read the Rental Payment Guarantee
and

      Understand
and agree to it’s terms.

      


      The
CO-SIGNER agrees to guarantee the payment of monetary damages suffered by
OWNER/AGENT subject to and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
RENTAL PAYMENT GUARANTEE (hereinafter referred to as

       “RPG”)
entered into between CO-SIGNER and OWNER/ANGENT

       

       

      The
R.P.G. shall continue in full force and effect for the entire term of TENANT or
TENANTS original lease. Any extension along with any rental increase during such
tenancy must be submitted in writing to CO-SIGNER 30 Days prior to any such
changes.

      


       

      


      Dated:
January 5,2009

       

       

      BY:
_________________________________________

       

      WECOSIGNTM Authorized
Agent
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    AIP
                        Home
                                    About
                                    Publications
                                    Software
                                    People
                                    Collaborations
                                    Careers
                                    Centennial
                                    Contact
                                    Dairy industry links
                    DirectionsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Docs







Mainheadline bar  BFGL Home PageWelcome to the Bovine Functional Genomics Laboratory web site. BFGL is part of the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center.The mission of BFGL is to improve the genetic and productive efficiency of cattle through research on gene expression and marker-assisted genetic selection.**BFGL**Building 306, Room 115,  BARC-East10300 Baltimore AvenueBeltsville, Maryland 20705-2350Phone: (301) 504-8342Fax: (301) 504-8414Updated: October 1, 2004cow graphic


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jonathan HALVORSEN, Appellant.

No. 08-1114.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 30, 2008.

Filed: Jan. 8, 2009.

*333Janet Petersen, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Sioux City, IA, Ian K. Thornhill, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Appellee.

Jonathan Halvorsen, Terre Haute, IN, pro se.

Douglas Lee Roehrich, Sioux City, IA, for Appellant.

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jonathan Halvorsen appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after revoking his supervised release. Upon reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we conclude that Halvorsen’s sentence is not unreasonable, *see United States v. Tyson,*413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir.2005) (per curiam) (standard of review of revocation sentences), because it is within the statutory limits of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(2) and (e)(3), and it resulted from the district court’s consideration of appropriate factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), *see United States v. Nelson,*453 F.3d 1004, 1006 (8th Cir.2006) (appellate court reviews revocation sentence to determine whether it was unreasonable in relation to, inter alia, certain § 3553(a) factors).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
[No. 20276-0-II.

Division Two.

August 28, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Patrick W. Fisk, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Grays Harbor County, No. 95-8-00159-7, F. Mark McCauley, J., entered December 7, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Hunt, J.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

KATHY GERMAN,

Appellant,

v.

JACQUELINE CHRISTIAN a/k/a JACQUELYN CHRISTIAN as Guardian 

of BRYANT JONES a/k/a BRIAN JONES and JEREMIAH POOLER,

Appellees.

No. 4D22-71

[August 10, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Kenneth Gillespie, Judge; L.T. Case No. PRC 19-0004302 

(62J).

Kathy German, Fort Lauderdale, pro se.

Nathaniel E. Green of Nathaniel E. Green, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Paul McCullen, Appellant.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant seeks to vacate his plea of guilty to attempted robbery in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.10). Viewing the record of the plea proceeding in its entirety, we conclude that defendant admitted the material elements of the crime to which he pleaded guilty. In any event, before accepting this reduced plea on a multicount indictment, the court took appropriate "precautions to assure that the defendant [was] aware of what he [was] doing” *(People v Serrano,*15 NY2d 304, 310).

There is no merit to defendant’s claim that the sentence imposed by the court was harsh and excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Marshall, J. — attempted robbery, second degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Pine, JJ.
#### SCHEIER, Appellant, v. HUDSON STRUCTURAL STEEL CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 22, 1912.)

Action by John Scheier against the Hudson Structural Steel Company. C. J. Earley, for appellant. J. B. Henney, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luis Munoz, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cooperman, J.), rendered September 10,1982, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree (four counts), assault in the second degree (three counts), arson in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that improper conduct on the part of the prosecution deprived him of a fair trial. We find that any remote chance of prejudice from the improper introduction of evidence from which an inference of flight could have been drawn was adequately cured by the trial court’s ruling which permitted defendant to introduce prosecution records which countered the inference. Indeed the record introduced by defense counsel accrued to defendant’s benefit as it directly, explicitly and persuasively rebutted the inference to be drawn from the People’s evidence and damaged their credibility. Defendant did not object to the court’s ruling, nor move for a mistrial. Accordingly, the ruling “must be deemed to have corrected the error to the defendant’s satisfaction” *(People v Williams,*46 NY2d 1070, 1071).

We find that the prosecutor’s comments during summation impeaching defendant’s credibility were proper *(see, People v Savage,*50 NY2d 673, *cert denied*449 US 1016), and within the four corners of the evidence.

While we strongly disapprove of certain questions posed to defendant’s character witness, defense counsel’s objections were sustained by the trial court, and reversal is not warranted *(see, People v Lopez,*67 AD2d 624, *cert denied*444 US 827). We have considered defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32



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 Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Report of Terra Nostra Resources Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the periods ended May 31, 2006 and 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald Nicholson, Principal Financial Officer, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  August 5, 2008

By:

Donald Nicholson



Name: Donald Nicholson

Title:   Principal Financial Officer
#### Dante ESGUERRA-DE VERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-70734.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*428Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 29, 2011.

Nancy Ellen Miller, Esquire, Law Offices of Reeves & Associates, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.

Paul Cygnarowicz, Trial, Oil, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Dante Esguerra-De Vera, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s findings of fact, *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (per curiam), and review de novo due process claims, *Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 614, 620 (9th Cir.2006). We deny the petition for review.

The evidence does not compel the conclusion that Esguerra-De Vera suffered past persecution or has a well founded fear of future persecution on account of his social group, political opinion, or any other protected ground. *See Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. at 481-84, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812; *Molina-Morales v. INS,*237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir.2001) (personal retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground). Accordingly, Esguer-ra-De Vera’s asylum claim fails.

Because Esguerra-De Vera failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum, his claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails. *See Zehatye v. Gonzales,*453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir.2006).

Esguerra-De Vera fails to raise any substantive challenge to the denial of his CAT claim. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not addressed in argument portion of brief are deemed waived).

Finally, Esguerra-De Vera’s due process claim fails because he has not demonstrated that he suffered prejudice resulting from any transcription error. *See Ibam-Flores,*439 F.3d at 620-21 (prejudice is required to prevail on due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### WAKEFIELD et al., Respondents, v. VILLAGE OF THERESA, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

September 25, 1907.)

Action by James W. Wakefield' and others against the ¡village of Theresa.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, without costs. The remedy of the respondent is to move at Special Term to have the case and exceptions declared abandoned.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with this Annual Report of Hewitt Associates, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



|                        |  |     |  |                        
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 17, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Russell P. Fradin  
|                        |  |     |  | Russell P. Fradin      
|                        |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Hewitt Associates, Inc. and will be retained by Hewitt
Associates, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission as and exhibit to the Form 10-K and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-K.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                                 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), each of
the undersigned officers of Biogen, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of 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 14, 2002                 /s/ James C. Mullen
                                        ------------------------------------
                                        JAMES C. MULLEN
                                        CHAIRMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                         AND PRESIDENT


Dated: August 14, 2002                  /s/ Peter N. Kellogg
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        PETER N. KELLOGG
                                        EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT - FINANCE
                                         AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.