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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                    OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                    994
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                             721
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                             1,409
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        3,512
<PP&E>                                  5,560
<DEPRECIATION>                          3,995
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          5,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     892
<BONDS>                                    17
<COMMON>                                  428
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                              3,733
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            5,085
<SALES>                                 3,575
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        3,575
<CGS>                                   2,219
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           3,477
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          4
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           128  
<INCOME-TAX>                               44
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        84
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                               84
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                             .02
                                  

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ernest Pinsonneault, Appellant.

— Casey, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Harris, J.), rendered May 15, 1984, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of robbery in the third degree.

Defendant’s conviction stems from a purse-snatching episode involving a 79-year-old woman who, during the incident, fell to the pavement and broke her arm. As a result, defendant was charged in the City of Cohoes Police Court with robbery in the second degree and was held for action by the Grand Jury. On May 1, 1984, however, defendant waived his right to prosecution by indictment and was charged in a superior court information with robbery in the third degree, to which he then pleaded guilty. A prison sentence of 2 Vis to 7 years was imposed.

On this appeal, defendant, who was 16 years of age at the time, complains that the failure of the trial court to afford him treatment as a youthful offender requires reversal under *People v Cruickshank*(105 AD2d 325). We disagree.

As pointed out by the trial court at the time of defendant’s sentence, defendant was involved in three Albany County Family Court proceedings before his sixteenth birthday, displayed no remorse for the crime of which he was convicted, and had this charge reduced from robbery in the second degree to robbery in the third degree. In the circumstances, we find no abuse of the trial court’s discretion in refusing him youthful offender treatment and no reason to consider youthful offender treatment in the interest of justice. This being the only issue raised on appeal, the judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Main, J. P., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.
**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 Med-Emerg International Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dr.
      Ramesh Zacharias Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that to the best of 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 presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      March 1, 2006





By:
            /s/
                Dr.
                Ramesh ZachariasName:
                Dr. Ramesh ZachariasTitle:
                Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 7 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                  S. 7

                    To reform the Federal tax code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 25 (legislative day, January 5), 2011

Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mrs. Gillibrand, 
 Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Lautenberg) introduced the following bill; which 
        was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    To reform the Federal tax code.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Comprehensive and Fair Tax Reform 
Act''.

SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

    It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should--
            (1) simplify and shrink the tax code to reduce burdens on 
        taxpayers and businesses;
            (2) eliminate wasteful tax breaks for special interests and 
        remove corporate tax loopholes;
            (3) get rid of extra tax breaks for millionaires and 
        billionaires; and
            (4) crack down on cheaters and close the tax gap.
                                 <all>
```
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 "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ending September 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"),
we, Robert B. Lees, President and director and John A. Palmer, Jr.,
Secretary/Treasurer and director 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 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
Company.


Date: 12/29/03                              /s/Robert B. Lees
      --------                              -----------------
                                            Robert B. Lees
                                            President and Director


Date: 12/29/03                              /s/John A. Palmer, Jr.
      --------                              ----------------------
                                            John A. Palmer, Jr.
                                            Secretary, Treasurer and Director
Order entered March 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00891-CR

No. 05-18-00892-CR

No. 05-18-00893-CR

FIDEL ANGEL NAVARRO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F17-75719-U, F17-75720-U, & F17-75721-U

ORDER

Appellant was convicted of two offenses of indecency with a child and one offense of 

aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years of age. Appellant filed his brief 

on March 11, 2019. In the brief, he uses the names of the victims. Accordingly, we STRIKE

appellant’s brief.

We ORDER appellant to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order, an amended 

brief that identifies the victims (and any witness who was under the age of eighteen at the time of 

the offenses) either generically (“victim” or “complaining witness”) or by initials only.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to Gary Udashen and the Dallas 

County District Attorney’s Office.

s/ CORY L. CARLYLE 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 13.2

                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

     In connection  with the Annual  Report of A/S  Steamship  Company Torm (the
"Company")  on Form 20-F for the year ended  December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the
"Report"),  I, Klaus Nyborg,  Chief Financial  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.

     A signed  original  of this  written  statement  has been  provided  to the
Company and will be retained  by the  Company  and  furnished  to the SEC or its
staff upon request.

Date: June 15, 2005


/s/ Klaus Nyborg
----------------
Chief Financial Officer
# C_2020010EN.01002201.xml

| 13.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/22

---

Appeal brought on 24 May 2019 by Hochmann Marketing GmbH against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) made on 22 March 2019 in Case T-673/18, Hochmann Marketing GmbH v European Commission

(Case C-409/19 P)

(2020/C 10/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Hochmann Marketing GmbH (represented by: J. Jennings, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

By order of 31 October 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Seventh Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.

---
#### Boy Francy TENDEAN, a.k.a. Boy Francy Tedean; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-73161.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 29, 2011.

Sharon A. Healey, Law Office of Sharon A. Healey, Seattle, WA, for Petitioners.

*415OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Judith Roberta O’Sullivan, Esquire, Trial, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief 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 **

Boy Francy Tendean and his family, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, *Wakkary v. Holder,*558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.2009), and we deny the petition for review.

Petitioners do not challenge the agency’s determinations that their asylum application was untimely, that they did not meet their burden of establishing past persecution, and that they are ineligible for CAT relief. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that petitioners have not established a clear probability of persecution. *See Wakkary,*558 F.3d at 1066 (“An applicant for withholding of removal will need to adduce a considerably larger quantum of individualized-risk evidence.”). Further, the record does not compel the conclusion that there is a pattern or practice of persecution against Christians in Indonesia. *See id.*at 1060-62. Accordingly, petitioners’ withholding of removal claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
exv10w1






EXHIBIT 10.1




THIRD AMENDMENT

TO

AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

OF

EPE UNIT L.P.




Dated as of December 2, 2009




     This Third Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Agreement of Limited Partnership dated
as of August 23, 2005 (as subsequently amended, the “Partnership Agreement”) of EPE Unit
L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), is made and entered into
effective as of December 2, 2009, pursuant to the terms of the Partnership Agreement and in
accordance with Section 12.05 thereof.



     Section 1. AMENDMENTS.



          (a)  Section 11.01. Paragraph (b) of Section 11.01 of the Partnership Agreement is
hereby amended and restated to read as follows:




          (b)  unless otherwise agreed to by the General Partner, the Class A Limited Partner and
a Required Interest, the date that falls on the second trading day immediately following
the first date as of which the distributions with respect to all outstanding EPE Units held
by the Partnership relating to the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2015 have been paid in
full by EPE;



     Section 2. RATIFICATION OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. Except as expressly modified and amended
herein, all of the terms and conditions of the Partnership Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.



     Section 3. GOVERNING LAW. THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, EXCLUDING ANY CONFLICTS-OF-LAW RULE OR PRINCIPLE THAT MIGHT
REFER THE GOVERNANCE OR CONTRUCTION OF THIS AGREEMENT TO THE LAWS OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION.



(Signature Page Follows)




 









 








     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first set
forth above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	GENERAL PARTNER:	 	EPCO, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ W. Randall Fowler
 

W. Randall Fowler

President and Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	CLASS A LIMITED PARTNER:	 	DUNCAN FAMILY INTERESTS, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Darryl E. Smith
 

Darryl E. Smith 

Treasurer
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	CLASS
B LIMITED PARTNERS:	 	Representing a majority of Class B Limited Partners of the Partnership, pursuant to Powers
of Attorney executed in favor of, and granted
and delivered to the General Partner 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
By:	 	 EPCO, INC.

(As attorney-in-fact for the Class B Limited
Partners pursuant to powers of attorney)	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ W. Randall Fowler	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	W. Randall Fowler 

President and Chief Executive Officer	 	 






Third Amendment to Agreement of Limited Partnership of EPE Unit L.P.
Exhibit 10.3





Exhibit 10.3


November 30, 2009


Bruce C. Smith 

Newpark Resources, Inc. 

Vice President


2700 Research Forest Drive, Suite 100 

The Woodlands, TX 77381


Re: Extension of salary reduction


Dear Bruce:


This letter sets forth the terms of our agreement
relating to the extension of the 10% reduction of your annualized Base Salary and the corresponding adjustment to
your incentive compensation under the EICP as set forth in the Amendment to the Employment Agreement, dated
April 23, 2009 (the “Amendment”), between you and Newpark Resources, Inc.
(“Company”). Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the
Amendment, the Employment Agreement, dated April 20, 2007, between you and the Company (the “Employment
Agreement”) and the Change in Control Agreement, dated January 7, 2008, between you and the Company
(the “Change in Control Agreement”). The terms of our agreement with regard to the extension are as
follows:


1. The 10% reduction to your annualized Base
Salary as set forth in the Amendment will continue in effect through March 31, 2010.


2. Beginning April 1, 2010, your annualized
Base Salary will be Three Hundred Thirty-Seven Thousand Fifty Dollars and No Cents ($337,050.00).


3. Your Base Salary for purposes of calculating
payments under the EICP will likewise be adjusted through March 31, 2010 to reflect this 10% reduction in your
annualized Base Salary.


4. If your employment is terminated prior to
March 31, 2010 pursuant to Section 2.3 of the Employment Agreement, your “lump sum payment”
will be calculated based upon your $337,050.00 annualized Base Salary and not on your “current annual Base
Salary” of $303,345.00.


5. If your employment is terminated prior to
March 31, 2010 pursuant to Section 2.2 of the Change in Control Agreement as a result of a Change in
Control (as defined therein) or a Potential Change in Control (as defined therein), your Termination Benefit will
be calculated based upon your $337,050.00 annualized Base Salary and not on your base salary at the time of
termination of $303,345.00.





1









 





6. This 10% reduction in your annualized Base
Salary and the corresponding adjustment to your incentive compensation under the EICP do not constitute
“Good Reason” for termination by you, as defined in Section 2.3 and 3.10(b) of the Employment
Agreement, or a termination by the Company. Except for the foregoing modifications, the Amendment and the
Employment Agreement will remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.


Sincerely,


Newpark Resources, Inc.


By:
/s/ Paul L. Howes                                                  

Name:
Paul L. Howes

Title: President and Chief Executive Officer




Agreed to and Accepted
this 2nd day of
December, 2009.


/s/ Bruce C. Smith                                                        


Bruce C. Smith



-2-





2
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

421 CA 11-02575 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, FAHEY, AND PERADOTTO, JJ.

STEWART M. SHUTE, JR., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V ORDER

ROBERT MCLUSKY AND MICHAEL BLOOM, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, ESQS., SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
RIEHLMAN, SHAFER & SHAFER, TULLY (JOEL I. ROSS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT MICHAEL BLOOM.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John C. Cherundolo, A.J.), entered November 4, 2011. The order settled the record for appeals from judgments entered July 14, 2010 and September 9, 2010. It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs ( see CPLR 5511; see also Town of Massena v Niagara Mohawk Power Corp ., 45 NY2d 482, 488).

Entered: June 8, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
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 Minera Andes Inc. (the
"Corporation"), on Form 10-QSB for the nine month period ended September 30,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Allen V. Ambrose, President of the Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Corporation.


MINERA ANDES INC.


Date: November 12, 2004                     By:  /s/  Allen V. Ambrose
      -----------------                        --------------------------------
                                                      Allen V. Ambrose
                                                      President
lcpm8k20091201ex10-3.htm


    
      

      

    

    Exhibit
No. 10.3

     

    Liberty
Capital Asset Management Inc.

    2470 St
Rose Parkway, Suite 314

    Henderson,
Nevada 89074

     

    Gentlemen:

     

    I
herewith tender my resignation as Director of Liberty Capital Asset Management,
Inc. to take affect as of the date this resignation document is executed by my
hand herein and/or upon the acceptance by the Board of Directors and/or upon the
Election of my Successor.  There are no disputes or disagreements with
the Company in relation to my resignation. 

     

    Very
truly yours,

    


    Dated
this 1st day of December, 2009.

    By: /s/Justin W.
Yorke

    Justin W.
Yorke