alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 182 (Thursday, September 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52943-52944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20591]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #17143 and #17144; New Jersey Disaster Number NJ-
00062]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of New Jersey

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 3.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of New Jersey (FEMA-4614-DR), dated 09/05/
2021.
    Incident: Remnants of Hurricane Ida.
    Incident Period: 09/01/2021 through 09/03/2021.

DATES: Issued on 09/19/2021.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/04/2021.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/06/2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of New Jersey, dated 09/05/2021, is hereby 
amended to

[[Page 52944]]

include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Warren
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Pennsylvania: Monroe, Northampton

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James Rivera,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2021-20591 Filed 9-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

August 16, 2010

ERRATUM

______________________

Appeal No. 2010-1102,-1103

IN RE BRIMONIDINE PATENT LITIGATION

--------------------------------- ------------- ALLERGAN, INC.,

v.

EXELA PHARMSCI INC. and EXELA PHARMSCI PVT., LTD.,

and

APOTEX INC. and APOTEX CORP.,

Decided: May 19, 2010

Precedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change:

Page 11, footnote 1, lines 9-10, the text should be changed to read Dose Response Study” (“Derick”). The dissent

characterizes that art icle
----

----

| Subsidiaries      of the Company                                  |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Subsidiaries                                                      |   | Percentage      Owned |   | Jurisdiction      of Incorporation |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun      National Bank                                            |   | 100% |   | United      States |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Med-Vine, Inc.      (1)                                           |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Del-Vine Inc.      (1)                                            |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun      Capital Trust V                                          |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun      Capital Trust VI                                         |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun      Statutory Trust VII                                      |   | 100% |   | Connecticut |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Capital      Trust VII                                        |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun      Capital Trust VIII                                       |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Financial      Services, L.L.C. (1)                           |   | 100% |   | New      Jersey |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| 2020      Properties, L.L.C. (1)                                  |   | 100% |   | New      Jersey |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Home Loans,      Inc. (1)                                     |   | 100% |   | New      Jersey |
|                                                              |   |   |   |   |
| (1)  Wholly-owned      subsidiary of Sun National Bank. |

----

----
#### Michael Cavallaro, Respondent, v Allstate Insurance Company, Appellant.

By the original arbitration award of June 23, 1983, the petitioner was awarded $363.54 in medical expenses, together with interest on that total running from November 9, 1978, and an attorney’s fee of $1,500. Thereafter, the petitioner sought to modify the award so that interest would run not only on the medical expenses but on "all payments made by the respondent”. On September 20, 1983, that application was denied, and the arbitrator reaffirmed the original award in all respects. The petitioner then made a further application for clarification of the award, seeking specifically to. determine if interest was to run only on the medical benefits, or on all other benefits as well. This application was granted, and the arbitrator clarified his award by stating that "[t]he Respondent shall pay interest *on the Medical expenses awarded to the claimant*at the rate of two percent (2%) per month, compounded, from November 9, 1978 to the date of payment” (emphasis added).

*626The petitioner then commenced the instant proceeding to confirm the award including in his papers an affirmation of the arbitrator, dated July 6, 1984, over one year after the award in question, in which he stated that it had been his intention to award interest from November 9, 1978, on late payments by the appellant of both the petitioner’s lost wages and overdue medical expenses. Over the opposition of the appellant, Special Term granted the application to confirm the award "as modified by the Affirmation of the Arbitrator”. This was error.

The purported modification, substantially expanding the arbitration award, exceeded the authority of the arbitrator *(see,*CPLR 7509, 7511 [c]). Additionally, the consideration of statements of an arbitrator with respect to his intentions, or his interpretation of the award is a practice which has been disapproved in the past *(see, e.g., Dahlke v X-L-O Automotive Accessories,*40 AD2d 666; *Matter of Weiner Co. [Freund Co.],*2 AD2d 341, *affd*3 NY2d 806). Where, as here, the affirmation in question was not the result of an application to modify *(cf. Matter of Board of Educ. [Florida Teachers Assn.],*104 AD2d 412, *affd*64 NY2d 824), and, in fact, contradicted the award on its face and the decisions of two previous applications for modification and clarification, it should not have been considered. Lazer, J. P., Niehoff, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
<!--/* //NOSONAR */--><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<!--/* //NOSONAR */--><html  lang="en-US">
<head id="Head"><meta id="MetaDescription" name="DESCRIPTION" /><meta id="MetaKeywords" name="KEYWORDS" /><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1" /><title>
	Command Master Chief Shane M. Carroll
</title><link id="css3605" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/module.css" /><link id="css4619" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/desktopmodules/ArticleCS/styles/DOD2/style.css" /></head>
<body>
    <main>
    <div>
    <div class="aprint bio">
    <div class="header">
        

        
        

        
        <span class="left"><img src="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Templates/DOD2%20-%20Biography/coastguard-bio-print-left.gif" style="border-width:0px;" /></span>
        

        

        

        
        <span class="right"><img src="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Templates/DOD2%20-%20Biography/coastguard-bio-print-right.gif" style="border-width:0px;" /></span>
        
        
        

        
        

        <h1 class="title">Command Master Chief Shane M. Carroll</h1>
        <h3 class="subtitle">Command Master Chief Thirteen Coast Guard District</h3>
        <h3 class="subtitle">U.S. Coast Guard</h3>
        <h3 class="subtitle"></h3>
    </div>
    <div>
        
    </div>
    <div>
        <p>This biography is currently unavailable.</p>

<p>For more information please contact the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard's office at mcpocg@uscg.mil.</p>

    </div>
</div>
    </div>
    </main>
</body>
</html>
----

|   | (i) | Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2016; and, |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | Registration Statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-207578), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|--------|------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Sincerely,                                    |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|   |                                          |
|   | SPROULE ASSOCIATES LIMITED                    |
|   |                                          |
|   |                                          |
|   | Original Signed by Nora T. Stewart, P.Eng.    |
|   |                                          |
|   |                                          |
|   | Nora T. Stewart, P.Eng.                       |
|   | Senior Vice President, Reserves Certification |

| 140 Fourth Avenue SW, Suite 900Calgary, AB, Canada T2P 3N3Sproule.comT +1 403 294 5500 F +1 403 294 5590 TF +1 877 777 6135 |  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|

----
#### Haigler *v.*Jones.

Appeal from Lowndes Circuit Court.

Tried before the Hon. A. A. Evans.

Whitten & Hinson, for appellant.

No counsel marked as appearing for appellee.

This was an action brought by the appellant, W. L. C. Haigler against J. W. Jones, and sought to recover *699damages for the breach of an alleged contract. The defendant pleaded the general issue and upon this plea the case was tried upon 'an agreed statement of facts, in which the allegations of the complaint were substantially shown to be correct. The court gave the general affirmative charge in favor of the defendant and there was judgment for the defendant from which the present appeal was prosecuted. On this appeal the court holds that the giving of the general affirmative charge was erroneous, since the allegations of the complaint were proven by the agreed statement of facts; it being declared Jby the court that whether or not the complaint was defective or liable to demurrer is immaterial, since the defendant, without questioning’ its sufficiency bjr demurrer, took issue on it, and the plaintiff proving its allegations, he was entitled to *recover.*— Irion *v. Lewis,*56 Ala. 190; *Ga. Pac. R. Co. v.*Propst, 90 Ala. 100.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion by

Haralson, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      10,879,000
<SECURITIES>                                 2,987,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,885,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   290,000
<INVENTORY>                                    892,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,691,000
<PP&E>                                      11,670,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,529,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,386,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,171,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       154,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  66,149,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                33,386,000
<SALES>                                     10,609,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,609,000
<CGS>                                        5,131,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,131,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,592,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,961,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (2,961,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,961,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.19)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7932

ROBERT ELTON STOTTS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

FRANK DREW, Sheriff; CAPTAIN SCHUCTER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-487-3)

Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 29, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Elton Stotts, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing

without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action for failure to

either provide the Defendants' addresses or explain why he was

unable to do so. Because a dismissal without prejudice is generally

not appealable, we dismiss the appeal. See Domino Sugar Corp. v.

Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.

1993). 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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daniel Hernandez, Appellant.

Prior to the commencement of the trial, the prosecution sought a ruling to permit testimony from the complainant, who at the time of the crime charged was 15 years old, that the defendant had made sexual overtures to her which she rejected. The defendant argues on appeal to this court that the trial court’s refusal to exclude the complainant’s testimony in this regard caused him to suffer severe prejudice because it tended to establish his guilt of uncharged crimes. We do not believe that the trial court’s determination was an improvident exercise of discretion.

The complainant’s testimony was properly admitted into evidence to establish the defendant’s motive and intent in discharging a pistol at the complainant *(see, People v Ventimiglia,*52 NY2d 350; *People v Moore,*42 NY2d 421, *cert denied*434 US 987; *People v Molineux,*168 NY 264). The portion of the complainant’s testimony challenged as prejudicial was "inextricably interwoven” with the subsequent events underlying the crimes charged and could not have been redacted "without distortion of its meaning” *(People v Ventimiglia, supra,*at p 362; *People v Vails,*43 NY2d 364, 368-369; *cf. People v Crandall,*67 NY2d 111, 116-117). Therefore, we find no fault with the trial court’s exercise of its discretion in admitting this evidence. Furthermore, the trial court struck a proper balance between the probative value of the evidence and its potential for prejudice by issuing appropriate instructions to the jury limiting consideration of this testimony to the issue of motive and intent *(see, People v Dupree,*110 AD2d 777, 778).

With respect to the defendant’s claim that the complainant’s testimony was improperly bolstered by the testimony of the arresting officer, we find that the defendant failed to preserve the alleged error by timely objecting thereto *(see, People v West,*56 NY2d 662) and we perceive no reason to reach the question in the interest of justice. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Fiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       SECTION 906 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the Quarterly Report of Emeritus Corporation, a Washington
corporation  (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30,
2003,  as  filed  with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the  "Form 10-Q/A"), I, Daniel R. Baty, Chief Executive 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  Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

2.     The  information  contained  in  the  Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.




                                            /s/    Daniel  R.  Baty
                                            -----------------------
                                            Daniel  R.  Baty
                                            Chief  Executive  Officer
                                            November  10,  2003


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 Emeritus Corporation and will be
retained  by  Emeritus  Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission  or  its  staff  upon  request."
EX-10.2





 Exhibit 10.2 

AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE 

This Amendment, dated as of June 22, 2021 (this “Amendment”) to that certain Promissory Note, principal amount $300,000
(the “Note”), issued on February 16, 2021, is entered into by and among Thimble Point Acquisition Corp. II, a Delaware Corporation (the “Maker”) and LJ9 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, or its
registered assigns or successors in interest (the “Payee”). 
 NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Maker and the Payee hereby amend the Note as follows: 
 1. Amendment to the
Note. The principal amount in the Note is hereby amended to Four Hundred And Fifty Thousand Dollars ($450,000). 
 2. Continued
Validity. Unless otherwise modified or supplemented by the terms of this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Note shall continue in full force and effect. 

3. Governing Law. All terms of and rights under this Amendment shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of New York,
without regard to conflict of law provisions thereof. 
 4. Amendments and Waivers. Any amendment hereto or waiver of any provision
hereof may be made with, and only with, the written consent of the Maker and the Payee. 
 [Signature Page Follows] 












 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first
above written. 
  

			
	 THIMBLE POINT ACQUISITION CORP. II

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Joseph Iannotta

		 	 Name: Joseph Iannotta

		 	 Title: Chief Financial Officer



  

			
	 LJ9 LLC

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Elon S. Boms

		 	 Name: Elon S. Boms

		 	 Title: Manager
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001001430
<NAME> THE THAXTON GROUP, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         254,286
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               63,574,776
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,205,170
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            47,249,001
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,885,053
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          822,015
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,789
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,421,052
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,885,053
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,909,835
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,854,001
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,423,355
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,720,758
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,911,721
<INCOME-TAX>                                   718,971
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,192,750
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,192,750
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31
        


</TABLE>