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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AVATEX CORPORATION FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          37,487
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,347
<ALLOWANCES>                                        15
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,395
<PP&E>                                             175
<DEPRECIATION>                                      85
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  90,838
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,933
<BONDS>                                          9,169
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          250,652
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        69,032
<OTHER-SE>                                   (253,971)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    90,838
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 185
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,736)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,736)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   5,828
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,092
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.41)


</TABLE>
#### Rex K. DeGEORGE and Katheryn Palmer DeGeorge, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. McCAMBRIDGE DEIXLER & MARMARO, LLP; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-55851.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed July 6, 2011.

Rex K. DeGeorge, Long Beach, CA, pro se.

Katheryn Palmer, McMinnville, OR, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

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).

*538MEMORANDUM **

Rex K. DeGeorge and Katheryn Palmer DeGeorge appeal pro se from the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice their action for failure to serve all but one of the defendants in a timely manner. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to serve timely a summons and complaint. *Oyama v. Sheehan (In re Sheehan),*258 F.3d 507, 511 (9th Cir.2001). We review de novo the denial of a motion to remand a removed case. *D-Beam Ltd. v. Roller Derby Skates, Inc.,*366 F.3d 972, 974 n. 2 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice because plaintiffs failed to serve the remaining defendants in a timely manner or show good cause for this failure. *See*Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m) (120-day time limit for service unless the plaintiff shows good cause); *In re Sheehan,*253 F.3d at 512 (setting forth factors for dismissal under Rule 4(m)).

The district court did not err in rejecting plaintiffs’ in forma pauperis application on the basis of a lack of proof of service. *See*Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(d).

The district court properly denied plaintiffs’ motion to remand because the court had federal question jurisdiction. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) — (b); *Emrich v. Touche Ross & Co.,*846 F.2d 1190, 1196 (9th Cir.1988) (RICO claim is removable because it arises under the laws of the United States).

Plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Docket ID FEMA-2020-0016]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Announcement of meetings; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of July 2, 2021, concerning an announcement of meetings to implement the Voluntary Agreement for the Manufacture and Distribution of Critical Healthcare Resources Necessary to Respond to a Pandemic. The document incorrectly listed certain meetings.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Robert Glenn, Office of Business, Industry, Infrastructure Integration, via email at                         *OB3I@fema.dhs.gov*                         or via phone at (202) 212-1666.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 2, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-14251 on page 35309, in the second column, correct the                     **DATES**                     caption to read:                

# DATES:

The schedule for these meetings is as follows:
    - The first meeting took place on Tuesday, June 22, 2021, from 2 to 4 p.m. Eastern Time (ET).
    - The second meeting took place on Wednesday, June 23, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
    - The third meeting will take place on Tuesday, July 20, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
    - The fourth meeting will take place on Thursday, July 22, 2021, from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.
    - The fifth meeting will take place on Tuesday, August 3, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
    - The sixth meeting will take place on Thursday, August 5, 2021, from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.

Dated: July 2, 2021.

Shabnaum Q. Amjad,

Acting Associate Chief Counsel, Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2021-14569 Filed 7-7-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-19-P
#### SMIDT, Respondent, v. BUFFALO COLD STORAGE CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March, 20, 1912.)

Action by John Smidt against the Buffalo Cold Storage Company.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Held, that the admission of the evidence of the plaintiff’s wife as to her physical condition was reversible error.

KRUSE, J., dissents.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. WILLIAM J. MATHESON & CO., Limited, v. ROBERTSON.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 15, 1898.)

Action by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of William J. Matheson & Co., Limited, against James A. Robertson & Co., Limited, against James A. Robertson, as comptroller.

No opinion. Determination of the comptroller confirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements.
[No. 21364-8-II.

Division Two.

September 26, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Brian C. Harrington, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 96-1-01091-0, Barbara D. Johnson, J., entered November 5, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Morgan, J.
2014 10-K - EX 10.50




Exhibit 10.50




         


Amendment Five to
Manufacturing and Purchase Agreement Between
Dot Hill Systems Corp. and Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd.


This Amendment Five ("Amendment") is dated November 14, 2014 (the ''Effective Date") and is an amendment to the Manufacturing and Purchase Agreement dated September 2008 (the "Agreement") between Dot Hill Systems Corp. and its subsidiaries ("Dot Hill") and Hon Hai Precision Industry Ltd, and its parents, subsidiaries and affiliate companies ("Foxconn").


Except as expressly set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement (including all amendments to the Agreement) shall continue in full force and effect. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings given thereto in the Agreement. This Amendment shall become part of the Agreement and all applicable terms and conditions of the Agreement.


Whereas, Dot Hill and Foxconn wish to extend the Term of the Agreement on an interim basis to allow for necessary updates to the Agreement;


Wherefore, the Agreement shall be revised as follows:


		
	1.
	Article 14.1 shall be deleted in its entirety, and in its place the following shall be inserted: 




"14.1 Term.  The Term of this Agreement shall be from the original Effective Date of the 
Agreement  (in September 2008) until and through February 11,2015, unless terminated 
pursuant to the termination provisions of this Agreement." 




In witness hereof, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as set forth below .
	
			
	Dot Hill Systems Corp.
	 
	Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd.

	/s/ Hanif Jamal
	 
	/s/ Peter Wu

	Name:  Hanif Jamal
	 
	Name:  Peter Wu

	Title:  CFO 
	 
	Title:  Director

	Date:  12/23/2014
	 
	Date: 12/16/2014







1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

LETCHER BURGESS ELLIS, SR. and )

LORI LYNN ELLIS, )

)

Appellants, )

)

v. ) 3:13CV690-PPS

)

J. RICHARD RANSEL, Trustee, )

)

Appellee. )

OPINION AND ORDER

On January 30, 2014, I dismissed for lack of jurisdiction the appeal by bankruptcy

debtors Letcher Ellis, Sr. and his wife Lori, based on my determination that their appeal of the

bankruptcy judge’s order granting the Trustee’s motion to sell real estate was moot. [DE 9.]

During the pendency of the appeal to the Seventh Circuit, the parties mediated the matter and

reached terms of settlement. After obtaining a bankruptcy court ruling indicating an inclination

to consider and approve the settlement (an “Indicative Ruling” under Fed.R.App.P. 12.1(b)), the

Trustee filed a motion to remand, which the Seventh Circuit has granted, with instructions to

remand to the bankruptcy court. [DE 17 at 3.] Following the Court of Appeals’ remand to this

court, the Trustee has filed another motion requesting the remand of the case to the bankruptcy

court. [DE16.]

ACCORDINGLY:

The Trustee’s motion to remand [DE 16] is GRANTED.

The Opinion and Order [DE 9] and Judgment [DE 10] previously entered dismissing this

appeal are VACATED.
Pursuant to the February 13, 2015 Order of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals [DE 17

at 3], this matter is REMANDED to the United States Bankruptcy Court to consider and

approve, if appropriate, the parties’ settlement of the contested matter. 

ENTERED: March 16, 2015.

 s/ Philip P. Simon 

CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2
#### In the Matter of Sixteen Eighty West 7th Corp., Appellant, v Board of Estimate of the City of New York, Respondent.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Estimate dated December 2,1982, *800which denied petitioner’s application for discretionary redemption of certain real property from in rem city ownership, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hirsch, J.), entered November 30, 1983, which dismissed the petition.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as petitioner was continuously delinquent in paying taxes on the subject property while he owned the same, failed to take advantage of the four-month “mandatory” redemption period (Administrative Code of City of New York § D17-25.0 [f]) and waited until the discretionary 20-month period had nearly expired (Administrative Code § D17-25.0 [g]) before applying for a release of the city’s interest in said property, we agree with Special Term that respondent’s determination was not arbitrary, capricious or irrational *(Solomon v City of New York Dept. of Gen. Servs.,*94 AD2d 283; *Benigno v City of New York,*123 Misc 2d 375). Such decisions, absent evidence of illegality, rest within the sound judgment of the Board *(Matter of Dwyer v Lindsay,*23 NY2d 562; *Benigno v City of New York, supra).*O’Connor, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                                Certification of
                             Chief Executive Officer
                         of Wyndham International, Inc.

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, and accompanies this quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 of Wyndham International,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

I, Fred J. Kleisner, Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify that to the
best of my knowledge:

(i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
     section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or
     78o(d)); and

(ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

Dated: August 13, 2003.

                                        /s/  Fred J. Kleisner
                                        ---------------------
                                        Name:  Fred J. Kleisner

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of August 2003.

/s/  Camaleta M. Roseman
----------------------------
Name:  Camaleta M. Roseman

Title: Notary Public

My commission expires: 05-24-04

     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 the Issuer and
will be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Felicia CARROLL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-30252

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 16, 2011.

Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, John Luke Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Prentice Lang White, Esq., Counsel, P.L. White Law Firm, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Felicia Carroll, Jeanerette, LA, pro se.

Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Felicia Carroll has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief citing *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). *See also United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011)(addressing requirements for an *Anders*brief). Carroll has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein.1 We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.

1

. Although counsel did not fully comply with *Flores,*our independent review of the record reveals that any deficiencies in the brief do not affect the conclusion that no nonfrivolous issues are presented.
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 Hampton Acquisition Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Gary Huang, President of Hampton Acquisition Corp.,
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:  March 19, 2004


/s/ Gary Huang
--------------------
Gary Huang, President
#### Chahdad C. BOLOURI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as acquirer of certain assets and liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank from the Federal *817Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank; Professional Foreclosure Corporation of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-2069.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 1, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 11, 2011.

Christopher Edwin Brown, Brown, Brown *&*Brown, PC, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. John C. Lynch, Troutman Sanders, LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Jonathan S. Hubbard, Troutman Sanders, LLP, Richmond, Virginia; Bizhan Beira-mee, Rathbun *&*Goldberg, PC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Chahdad C. Bolouri appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss his state law claims for declaratory judgment, quiet title, and negligence, and his claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1692-1692p (West 2009 & Supp.2011). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. *See Bolouri v. Bank of America, N.A.,*No. 1:10-ev-00225-LO-TCB (E.D.Va. August 24, 2010); *see also Horvath v. Bank of N.Y., N.A.,*641 F.3d 617 (4th Cir.2011). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-10511 Conference Calendar

JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus LEE R. RAYMOND, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CV-450-H

-------------------- October 18, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * John Robert Demos, Jr. (Washington state prisoner #287455), has, on at least three prior occasions, filed in forma pauperis (IFP) complaints that have been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state a claim. See Demos v. Arledge , No. H-00-719 (S.D. Tex.; Mar. 28, 2000); Demos v. Sysco Corp. , No. H-94-2209 (S.D. Tex.; Oct. 19, 1994); Demos v. Doe , No. 3:94-CV-1805-D (N.D. Tex; Nov. 7, 1994), aff’d , No. 94-11064 (5th Cir.; Mar. 2,No. 00-10511 - 2 - 1995). Demos is thus BARRED from proceeding IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is in prison unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Therefore, his leave to proceed IFP on appeal, which district court granted by order on July 5, 2000, is DECERTIFIED. Demos’s appeal is DISMISSED. He may seek to reinstate his appeal by paying the full appellate filing fee of $105 to the clerk of the district court within 15 days of the date of this opinion. IFP DECERTIFIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES BAR IMPOSED.
##### 



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 Town Sports International, Inc. (the
Company) on form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert
Giardina, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. (Section Mark) 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (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 represents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of the Company.

/s/ ROBERT GIARDINA
Robert Giardina
Town Sports International, Inc.
Chief Executive Officer
August 5, 2003

28
Exhibit 32.1



Statement



Pursuant to §906 of the sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of Sonic Foundry, Inc. (the Company)
hereby certifies that to the knowledge of the undersigned:



| | (1) |  | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 14, 2003

/s/Rimas P. BuineviciusRimas P. BuineviciusChief Executive Officer




27